Update records-wip.md

[agocke]

Relates to dotnet/roslyn#40726 (test plan for records)

[gafter]

A valid with expression has a receiver with a non-void type. The receiver type must contain an accessible parameterless instance method called Clone whose return type must be the type of the receiver express type, or a base type thereof.

I have no idea what this means. #Closed

---

Refers to: proposals/records-wip.md:92 in e67167a. [](commit_id = e67167a, deletion_comment = False)

[gafter]

sequence of assignments with a compiler-generated record property of the receiver on the left-hand side of the

I don't know what this means.

---

Refers to: proposals/records-wip.md:95 in e67167a. [](commit_id = e67167a, deletion_comment = False)

[gafter]

A valid with expression has a receiver with a non-void type. The receiver type must contain an accessible parameterless instance method called Clone whose return type must be the type of the receiver express type, or a base type thereof.

Record types, as defined herein, do not typically contain such a Clone method, so this section doesn't make sense in the context of this spec. #Closed

---

Refers to: proposals/records-wip.md:92 in e67167a. [](commit_id = e67167a, deletion_comment = False)

[agocke]

I modified the phrasing to clarify that the return type of a Clone method must be the receiver type or a base type.

[agocke]

Record types, as defined herein, do not typically contain such a Clone method, so this section doesn't make sense in the context of this spec.

Seems well-defined to me. Records may implicitly define a Clone method in a future revision of the spec, but I haven't gotten there yet.

[gafter]

sequence of assignments with a compiler-generated record property of the receiver on the left-hand side of the

I think you need to identify the lookup rules and the error cases.

---

In reply to: 612224166 [](ancestors = 612224166)

---

Refers to: proposals/records-wip.md:95 in e67167a. [](commit_id = e67167a, deletion_comment = False)

[gafter]

I'm having a hard time making sense of the overall specification with just the pieces you're revealing. I understand you're only implementing some pieces, but without the missing pieces of the spec... the things that are in the spec you're providing don't fit together.

[agocke]

Yup, I'll try to clarify this a bit more. It may be better to just write this using "init-only" terminology and then note the implementation gaps in the PR.

[agocke]

Added some notes about initonly without going into too much detail.

I'm not clear what you mean by comments on the lookup rules. The lookup for Clone() is just straightforward method lookup, and the property lookup is equivalent to lookup for a property get

[gafter]

We don't have a "lookup for a property get". We just do a simple name lookup (or qualified name lookup).