The proposed record types are just regular types with minimal changes to the initialization syntax. It's not like the divide between value types (``struct`` ) a

The proposed record types are just regular types with minimal changes to the initialization syntax. It's not like the divide between value types (``struct`` ) and reference types (``class``), which indeed have quite different semantics. You can argue that this is too much, but IMHO you need some way to guarantee that value types will behave like primitives without introducing a massive burden on the gc.