Don Syme

@cartermp Yes, I am in favour of this. Marking as approved

I think it's good, I've needed this and it's not possible to write easily with comprehensions. I do think I prefer `partitionBy`. I don't think the core library should have...

I don't see any real objections so will mark as approved.

The name `split` should also be considered, despite the other uses of splitInto, splitAt etc. Compare with this for Event.split for example. https://github.com/dotnet/fsharp/blob/main/src/FSharp.Core/eventmodule.fsi#L215

Should be fixed by https://github.com/fsprojects/FSharp.Formatting/pull/767 Problem seems to have been related to using relative input paths (which is normal) - the testing for link translation in FSharp.Formatting was only testing...

Of the two different suggestions here, I find ```fsharp type ItemQuantity of float ``` more interesting. It's fairly simple and straight-forward and in principle it's not so bad to have...

> Another question is what would be implications of these parameters looking like parameters in a object type implicit constructor? If they're going to be accessible like record fields, then...

Possibly: ``` type V2(val X:float, val Y:float) = member EuclideanNorm = sqrt(X*Y + Y*Y) let x = V2(2.,3.).X ``` I'd love to see a prototype of this

Also ```fsharp type V2(val mutable X:float, val mutable Y:float) = member EuclideanNorm = sqrt(X*Y + Y*Y) let x = V2(2.,3.).X ``` and ```fsharp type V2(internal val X:float, internal val Y:float)...

I'm marking this as approved - we should sort this out one way or another, and also document the necessary workaround