Don Syme

I agree with this in principle, though I'm not convinced by the `@=` syntax - it may be possible to simply use `=` I will mark this as approved in...

> We need to differentiate between assignment and calling Add without assigning because it is assumed that an instance has been given by the constructor. Yes, if the collection property...

@Happypig375 Did you compare and contrast with https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-suggestions/issues/290? thanks

@Overlord-Zurg THe two main issues are 1. ``f (x=1)`` is not reserved - it is a valid program today e.g. ``` > let x = 1 - let f x...

From Language Design Office Hours: > @dsyme says: > optional and named arguments on module-let-defined functions is something I'd like to see done, in my heart of hearts. > >...

More comments from Language Design Office Hours: > @dsyme says > should mark it approved-in-principle, with a sketch of the design rules. Basically > > 1. allow optional and named...

> Given the issue with x=y, would it not be too terrible to have OCAML syntax? We would just put it under a `/langversion:5.0` switch. There's no chance we would...

Just to say that it might be worth mentioining that `[]` is often used unnecessarily in F# code - though of course it has its uses. So the workaround ```fsharp...

> Type abbreviations of this form can be very useful in enforcing abstractions through abstract, private, etc. @A-Manning Could you give a couple of detailed examples please? Many thanks

There are technical reasons why this wasn't allowed in F# - though you could argue about their importance, and it depends what features of F# and .NET you use For...