In practice, this ends up being mostly simple to deal with.

In the other direction, consuming C# libraries historically hasn't had too much trouble other than they don't really design them with any functional-leaning in mind. The real problem that's growing recently is the dotnet teams move towards C#-centric features. Things like source-generators, roslyn, etc that are "C# features" and not "dotnet features". These types of things could create a big enough rift to break practical usage of F# as a dotnet interoping language if it goes unchecked.

Records have built in equality logic, Classes don't.

And, because of the interop story, they wanted to be able to define classes.

> C# reified generics and rust like monomorphised generics (with inline keyword) and they used to have two different syntaxes until recently

I almost prefer the old way, where SRTPs required the other syntax. On the other hand I guess between 'inline' and constraints the compiler makes the 'best choice' now...

Also, just minor pedantic comment, both C# and F# will monomorphize for struct of T