You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is not something which has obviously "already been decided" in previous versions of F#. If you're questioning a fundamental design decision that has obviously already been taken (e.g. "Make F# untyped") then please don't submit it.
Please tick all that apply:
This is not a breaking change to the F# language design
I or my company would be willing to help implement and/or test this
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Just to say that it might be worth mentioining that [<Literal>] is often used unnecessarily in F# code - though of course it has its uses. So the workaround
Title of Suggestion
I propose we solidify the interaction between literals defined in a recursive context to allow expressions like this:
And if #539 is implemented, the following would also work:
It's important to note that this does overlap with suggestions like #539 because if they are implemented, this issue becomes more pronounced.
Currently, there is no reasonable workaround. The examples with
nameof
need to be written in one of these two ways:Neither actually accomplishes the goal of the desired code though.
Pros and Cons
The advantages of making this adjustment to F# are:
nameof
in places where it feels naturalThe disadvantages of making this adjustment to F# are
Extra information
Estimated cost (XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL): M-L
Related suggestions: (put links to related suggestions here)
Affidavit (please submit!)
Please tick this by placing a cross in the box:
Please tick all that apply:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: