Sure. Write a Roslyn analyzer to help out here. Note: it's not like you can just sprinkle 'ref' on the return type of your methods willy nilly. Like 'ref'/'out' parameters, it requires you to do very specific things to…
Hi David, language designer here. Can you give an example of where you'd want to take advantage of this in C#? Thanks!
Hi there! C# language designer here. You can see (and participate in) the discussion on records here if you'd like: https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/issues/10154 > Seems like it'd be a cinch to implement Ah... how i…
Hi there, C# language designer here. I don't really see your example in that way. Let's start with the latter one first: > bar(out *); // oops, not I; was up too late coding I'm not sure how this situation is any…
Hey there, C# language designer here. > Out variables seem like a mis-feature, especially when they are adding a better alternative (Tuples) in the same release. Out variables are really great when working with existing…
Sure. Write a Roslyn analyzer to help out here. Note: it's not like you can just sprinkle 'ref' on the return type of your methods willy nilly. Like 'ref'/'out' parameters, it requires you to do very specific things to…
Hi David, language designer here. Can you give an example of where you'd want to take advantage of this in C#? Thanks!
Hi there! C# language designer here. You can see (and participate in) the discussion on records here if you'd like: https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/issues/10154 > Seems like it'd be a cinch to implement Ah... how i…
Hi there, C# language designer here. I don't really see your example in that way. Let's start with the latter one first: > bar(out *); // oops, not I; was up too late coding I'm not sure how this situation is any…
Hey there, C# language designer here. > Out variables seem like a mis-feature, especially when they are adding a better alternative (Tuples) in the same release. Out variables are really great when working with existing…