Formatter removing record field punning?

[illusionalsagacity]

Is this intended behavior? I seem to remember refmt automatically using punning

https://rescript-lang.org/try?code=PTAEAUBsFMEMGdqgHYHsAu0BcAoEoBaIvMAFQAskpYBPAcwCdUBXZAE1AEt5R51PIkULFAB3VAwDWXZKAAOTRtHjwSoAErQAygGMGnOelBhUkDpoSpZ8GsnSwAHr3Isz82A0SgAVsz5qAM05kJAAKOlRQdEj0SlAAIi1odH5kOnh49xChAIko1Do6SGC6Xlt7BwBKADoSNQAxaGgchib8+UhaYSZWDlh2UB1UAFs5ASR4Eeg1TV19Q0HUNmgAQhwcdBo5JFzIgF5QAG9YLF50fTSAGlAAI1O+C7oAX3WYIxED+IDYSWh4nDet1An2iv2Q-wByUGwKOsGuNxeQA

type example = {a: string, b: string}
let a = "fake"
let b = "token"
let c = {a, b}

gets formatted to:

type example = {a: string, b: string}
let a = "fake"
let b = "token"
let c = {a: a, b: b}

[pckilgore]

You might be interested in #64 / if not a dupe of #47 I'd add more info!

[illusionalsagacity]

You might be interested in #64 / if not a dupe of #47 I'd add more info!

Thanks! It does appear to be a dupe of #47

[illusionalsagacity]

Hm, on second look no it's not, this is for initializing the record in a let assignment or return value, not a type declaration

[IwanKaramazow]

Hmm, this is indeed a good point. I've probably missed this in the whole ReScript syntax rewrite. Thanks for pointing this out. Looking into this.

[cknitt]

Formatting the punning away makes the code more verbose/harder to read.

My understanding, too, is that punning should only go away for type declarations, not for record initialization, see #64 (comment).

[ryyppy]

Fixed