Changes between Version 20 and Version 21 of Records


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Dec 29, 2011 4:54:12 PM (4 years ago)
Author:
GregWeber
Comment:

commentary on module/record re-use

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Records

    v20 v21  
    5858 * '''Use the module name space mechanism'''; after all that's what it's for.  But putting each record definition in its own module is a bit heavyweight. So maybe we need local modules (just for name space control) and local import declarations.  Details are unclear. (This was proposed in 2008 in [http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2008-August/046494.html this discussion] on the Haskell cafe mailing list and in #2551. - Yitz). 
    5959 
    60  Rather than strictly re-use modules it would make more sense to have a name-spacing construct that is shared between both records and modules - hopefully this would make implementation easier. 
     60 Rather than strictly re-use modules it would make more sense to have a name-spacing construct that is shared between both records and modules - hopefully this would make implementation easier. Overall this seems to be more of an implementation detail that may have a side effect of making local modules easier to implement than a concrete design proposal relating to records - GregWeber. 
    6161 
    6262'''Anyone who likes these designs, please fill out a detailed design, either here or on another page'''.