Isak Sky

@theprash A slight variation that is slightly more explicit would be: ``` type InventoryRow = { name: string = ""; weight: float; tags: string list = ["unlabeled"]; quantity: int =...

One of the goals of this is to prevent needing to make record constructors private because of how brittle they are. As things stand now, you cannot expose them in...

@isaacabraham @enricosada F# already has this for classes: ```fsharp and InventoryRow()= member val name : string = "" with get, set member val weight : float = 0. with get,...

> One properties I like the most about records is they're more like constructors than a bag of properties. When you add a property to a record, there is an...

> I think standard objects already exist for when you have default values and better suit your described scenario where you don't want the code to turn red. There's nothing...

@abelbraaksma What you say makes sense, my only objection would be that I think programmers can be trusted to just not provide a default value for a field if it...

> The need for disambiguation isn't related to optional arguments. If we take over the other existing syntax, it would: 1) cause backward incompatible language changes 2) remove the ability...