On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Wolfgang Jeltsch <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:g9ks157k@acme.softbase.org">g9ks157k@acme.softbase.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Am Montag, den 07.11.2011, 18:16 +0100 schrieb Claus Reinke:<br>
<div class="im">> > I am unsure which of this list of proposals you are referring to. The<br>
> > URL you quote is this<br>
> > <a href="http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/FirstClassLabels" target="_blank">http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/wiki/FirstClassLabels</a><br>
><br>
> That sounds familiar, I think I wrote that when I was younger;-)<br>
><br>
> > but it doesn't seem to actually contain a design, merely some options<br>
> > for a design that is implicit.<br>
><br>
> Please note that this particular instance of FirstClassLabels was *not*<br>
> about record systems themselves (already a hopeless mess of proposals<br>
> and preferences back then), but about a feature that would help defining<br>
> record systems *in the language*.<br>
<br>
</div>Indeed. And I think it is important to make implementing new record<br>
systems in the language easier. Each record system built into the<br>
language might lack some features that someone wants. So it would be<br>
good if one could come up with one’s own record system easily.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>On the other hand, I would rather have one half-way decent record system that doesn't try to do everything than a bunch of ad hoc incompatible ones.</div>
<div><br></div><div>-Edward</div></div>