Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Record update #39

Open
foxfriends opened this issue Dec 5, 2020 · 0 comments
Open

Record update #39

foxfriends opened this issue Dec 5, 2020 · 0 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects

Comments

@foxfriends
Copy link
Owner

foxfriends commented Dec 5, 2020

Currently the semantics of record tails when the field is defined both in the head and the tail is not very clear. This should be made more clear, such that a field in both head and tail is valid, but the one in the head will take priority. This should help make updating a record a little easier:

// Currently, name must be removed from the record so it can be updated reliably. 
// This also requires the record previously had the name field.
setName(Name, person { name: _, ..P }, person { name: Name, ..P }).
// After change, this would not be the case:
setName(Name, person(P), person { name: Name, ..P }).
@foxfriends foxfriends added this to RFC in Features via automation Dec 5, 2020
@foxfriends foxfriends moved this from RFC to To do in Features Dec 5, 2020
@foxfriends foxfriends added the enhancement New feature or request label Dec 5, 2020
@foxfriends foxfriends moved this from To do to In progress in Features Dec 10, 2020
@foxfriends foxfriends moved this from In progress to To do in Features Dec 11, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant