Haskell considers adopting Rust's method name resolution rules

ghc.haskell.org

13 pointsheydenberk3 comments

As pointed out by Daniel Peebles on Twitter, this title ("Haskell considers adopting Rust's method name resolution rules") is not a good summary of the current state of affairs. This is a five-year-old proposal that is not being seriously or actively considered for inclusion in Haskell:

https://twitter.com/copumpkin/status/470973308284837888

(The proposal also predates Rust, so the similarity to Rust's method resolution is due to independent invention, rather than inspiration.)

In fact, this title is nonsense. I would describe the current state of the proposal as "actively rejected". That doesn't stop beginners from reinventing it every few months, of course. That's probably the main reason that page sticks around - to have someplace to point to and say "It's already been suggested, and it hurts the state of the language far more than it helps."

Although, as mbrubeck points out, this isn't seriously being considered anymore (as, for one, it's much harder to retrofit into the design of Haskell), it was nice to see that Simon Peyton-Jones independently came up with the silly idea I had for dot notation a few years ago. :)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com