[melolife]

Collection literals are a pointless extension of the pattern matching syntax added to get around the fact that there is no way to name a generic type in C# without specifying its type arguments.

It's yet another double down on object initializers instead of writing constructors and factories, and unlike using a factory you have to fully express the result type of the collection instead of having it inferred (they are "target typed", another feature that probably should not have been added).

[Rapzid]

There is a pattern matching aspect but I think the energy behind it is largely motivated by a desire to clean up syntax when working with data structure based APIs and DSLs.

I've read the proposal, design meeting notes, and GH conversations. Not seeing a compelling counter argument here.