Changes between Version 20 and Version 21 of Records

Timestamp:

12/29/11 08:54:12 (17 months ago)

Author:

GregWeber

Comment:

commentary on module/record re-use

Records

@@ -58 +58 @@
  * '''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).
 
- 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.
+ 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.
 
 '''Anyone who likes these designs, please fill out a detailed design, either here or on another page'''.