Allow attributes on let bindings in nested functions.

[teo-tsirpanis]

I propose we allow attributes on let bindings in nested functions.

The existing way of approaching this problem in F# is by moving the function outside. An example of attribute one would need to add is trimming annotations

Pros and Cons

The advantages of making this adjustment to F# are simpler and more encapsulated code.

The disadvantages of making this adjustment to F# are 🤷🏻‍♂️

Extra information

Estimated cost (XS, S, M, L, XL, XXL): S

Related suggestions: Not found

Affidavit (please submit!)

Please tick this by placing a cross in the box:

• This is not a question (e.g. like one you might ask on stackoverflow) and I have searched stackoverflow for discussions of this issue
• I have searched both open and closed suggestions on this site and believe this is not a duplicate
• This is not something which has obviously "already been decided" in previous versions of F#. If you're questioning a fundamental design decision that has obviously already been taken (e.g. "Make F# untyped") then please don't submit it.

Please tick all that apply:

• This is not a breaking change to the F# language design
• I or my company would be willing to help implement and/or test this

For Readers

If you would like to see this issue implemented, please click the 👍 emoji on this issue. These counts are used to generally order the suggestions by engagement.

[abelbraaksma]

Related: #984

These two suggestions should probably be considered as one (they’re not the same, but I guess the work to be done is very similar: that is, on compiler generated methods).

[charlesroddie]

trimming annotations

These are not needed unless you are working outside of type systems, e.g. reflection. F# should make it less convenient to do that (e.g. via warnings that must be disabled), not more!

[Happypig375]

-> #848

[teo-tsirpanis]

Thanks @Happypig375, closing as duplicate.