Pluto doesn't like adding constructors to structs

[MasonProtter]

Compare

versus

Seems like a bug in the algorithm for detecting multiple incompatible definitions of something.

[fonsp]

This is on purpose, handling a mix of structs definitions and methods is very diffcult, because:

1. pluto should be able to undo the scope effect from any cell. Pluto does support multiple methods across cells (👒 Include function signature in reactive edge - fix #177 #538), because it is relatively easy to delete methods defined in one cell, while keeping those defined in other cells. With structs, we also need to take the newly defined type into account.
2. The outer constructor is a recursive call, see Cyclic references between methods in cells #178

[MasonProtter]

I get that it's difficult, but I feel this issue should stay open (whether or not anyone is actively working on it). This is certainly an issue other people will run into at some point so it'd be good for them to see that there's already an open issue.

If you want, you can even use the 'Won't Fix' label.

[SyxP]

If you want a workaround somehow, the following works. (Not that I encourage the following style)

struct Temp
	x
end

Temp(4)

for i in [:Temp]
	@eval ($i)() = Temp(42)
end

Temp()

[MasonProtter]

Yeah, one can also just do

@eval $(:Temp)() = Temp(42)

Still pretty unsightly, but a bit better.

[fonsp]

I don't recommend this to general users -- it will lead to lots of hidden issues later. Use a begin block.