implementation of record constructor auto-initialization [was Re: instance initializer]

[Brian Goetz]

Given than most users don’t even realize you can say `return` in a constructor, this seems a reasonable restriction.  The whole point of a compact ctor is to NOT have to specify the field initialization.  

> On Sep 6, 2019, at 10:53 AM, Maurizio Cimadamore <maurizio.cimadamore at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 06/09/2019 15:45, Brian Goetz wrote:
>>> 
>>> Actually - not sure - what do you mean by "exit path"? We clearly can't have "returns" here. And, if we "throw" then we don't care much about initializing.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> Returns are exactly what I was concerned about; currently return is allowed, though weird, in ctors.
>> 
>> If you want to say “no return in compact ctor”, that’s a reasonable simplification (though we’ll battle this beast again later when we want to expand some of the compact-ctor goodies to more general class constructors.)
>> 
> I think I'd slightly prefer it to restrict it that way - not out of compiler complexity (as I said, a try/catch should be enough to handle it) - but out of managing user expectations.
> 
> Maurizio
>