Deconstruct with exact type match should be preferred in case in ambiguity

[Happypig375]

Version Used: latest master (687393280df246e67b5878c5377b1a6b062fa3b1)

Steps to Reproduce: https://sharplab.io/#v2:EYLgtghgzgLgpgJwD4DsJjlADhAxnAAgAEBGAOgCUBXFGASwzIGEB7MLOgG0QGVEA3OvigEA3sQBMBAJJQAogA94CNJ2ko6MMQQC+ugLAAoI0QDMBBHFwsEAEwIANABR1aBBQEptOk+cvW7AgBNJwd3L3EzYgAWAgARKxYUWAQqXBgnFiotVy0wLwBeAD4CMAIC9zIFAG4DY0MiKQAtbWAWFk4CACEnIIIAT0KS/oI6ERCSD1qfQyA==

namespace System.Runtime.CompilerServices { class IsExternalInit { } }

public record X(int x) { }
public record Y(X x) { public void Deconstruct(out int m) => m = x.x; }

class Z { bool B(Y y) => y is Y(1); }

Expected Behavior: The overload with int is chosen since 1 is an int which is an exact type match.

Actual Behavior: error CS0121: The call is ambiguous between the following methods or properties: 'Y.Deconstruct(out X)' and 'Y.Deconstruct(out int)'

[gafter]

Since this is requesting a language change, transferring to csharplang.

[HaloFour]

#1998 (comment)
#1998 (comment)

[Happypig375]

@HaloFour Well there's no way to disable the generated Deconstruct with record types without losing the convenient shorthand for properties and constructors.

[HaloFour]

@Happypig375

Symmetry between construction/deconstruction is one of the purposes of positional records. You could use a nominal record. That doesn't have either a constructor or deconstructor, but you can use initializers and bring your own Deconstruct method.