Changes between Version 10 and Version 11 of Records/DeclaredOverloadedRecordFields/ImplementorsView


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Feb 21, 2012 2:48:16 AM (4 years ago)
Author:
guest
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Records/DeclaredOverloadedRecordFields/ImplementorsView

    v10 v11  
    7272The definition of `get` uses ‑XDisambiguateRecordFields style (with ‑XNamedFieldPuns).
    7373
    74 [It's a wart that in the record declaration, we've had to repeat the type of `customer_id` when the `fieldLabel` decl has already stipulated `Int`. It is legal syntax to omit the type in the record decl, but that currently has a different effect:
    75 {{{
    76     data ... = Cust_NA { customer_id, custName :: String, ... }
    77 }}}
    78 currently means `customer_id` is to be same type as `custName`.
    79 
    80 Opportunity for improvement! ]
     74    [It's a wart that in the record declaration, we've had to repeat the type of `customer_id` when the `fieldLabel` decl has already stipulated `Int`. It is legal syntax to omit the type in the record decl, but that currently has a different effect:
     75{{{
     76        data ... = Cust_NA { customer_id, custName :: String, ... }
     77}}}
     78    currently means `customer_id` is to be same type as `custName`.
     79
     80    Opportunity for improvement! ]
    8181
    8282=== Record/field update ===