[ragnese]

> Structs/value types can be mutable, records are not.

Fair point about record fields not being reassignable (not the same as immutable for others reading this).

> And as far as I know, while records have a sane default equals defined, they are still identity objects in that they are passed by reference.

Well, sure. All non-primitives are passed by reference. That doesn't stop them from being referred to as value types.

But in light of your first point, I agree that choosing a totally new term probably makes sense.

[kaba0]

I stand corrected, shallowly immutable or as you note fields not being reassignable it is.