Amadeusz Sadowski

C# lang design discussion: https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/meetings/2018/LDM-2018-10-22.md#nominal-records

Maybe we can build something similar, or would hiding the constructor be enough?

That's something I did consider, and also is associated with https://github.com/amis92/RecordGenerator/issues/46 (I think originally I opened this issue with exactly what you want in mind as well, but didn't expand...

Some ideas: * `OptionalWither` * `WithOptional` * `WitherExperimental` --- I'm strictly opposed to generating our own `Optional` type. It has a lot of issues: * Two projects with records will...

@atifaziz I believe that the major value of providing the single `With` method with optional parameters is that at the call site it's almost like an initializer/very readable. ```csharp record.With(name:...

I do believe that making this configurable is not a very high cost, and with a reasonable default, even providing one's own implementation is a 7-liner: ```csharp public struct Optional...

Okay, I think I've been using Optional's previous versions, maybe 3.x - the current one doesn't offer the implicit "Some" interpretation of the T, so my desired API wouldn't work...

Yup. But then I was wrong (at least about Optional package). Now I'm not sure what's the best approach. ### Optuple Using built in value tuples as you suggested is...

I'd definitely prefer the old conditional operator, and don't forget we always use `Update` :) ```csharp // generated code public Person With( Optional name = default, Optional age = default)...

Also I really don't enjoy the idea of imposing additional dependencies. This also results in downstream dependency versioning, which we'd have to take into account - right now we're very...