From aac072bb5f38245de40bcd28de741b5d09fa6dd8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Arseny Kapoulkine Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 16:11:58 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] Update rfcs/records.md Co-authored-by: Alan Jeffrey <403333+asajeffrey@users.noreply.github.com> --- rfcs/records.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/rfcs/records.md b/rfcs/records.md index d1a6d15c..18c20cbd 100644 --- a/rfcs/records.md +++ b/rfcs/records.md @@ -153,7 +153,7 @@ match, which makes records similar to sealed tables from the type checking persp > Alternatively, is `export type Record = Record` too awkward? The methods defined on the record object are type checked as usual, with one exception - the implicit `self` has the type of the record. This is crucial because -this is the one big issue we can't resolve with metatable-based OOP for tables, but it works for records because `:` is slightly more magical. +this is the one big issue we haven't yet resolved with metatable-based OOP for tables, but it works for records because `:` is slightly more magical. When `self` is explicit, the type needs to be specified manually, e.g. these definitions are equivalent: