11–20 of 145 posts
I know its hard http://blog.coverity.com/2013/11/20/c-non-nullable-reference...
But dang I would appreciate it. So much code is cluttered with null checks that increases the robustness of the code at the cost of correctness, readability, and poorly defined behavior.
Seems like a small change but that nameof(argument) method for ArgumentXExceptions is incredibly handy.
I'm tempted to use C# in the future again. Using it on Windows has always been good - and now that it compiles to native code too and that the libs are open....
I'm going to take some hits for that but... with .NET being open source (never liked Mono..) and all.. I'm tempted to use C# in the future again. Using it on Windows has always been good - and now that it compiles to native code too and that the libs are open....
Seems like a small change but that nameof(argument) method for ArgumentXExceptions is incredibly handy.
[1] http://devblog.guidewire.com/2011/03/03/feature-literals/
As I write more and more code, the more I want simplicity and ease of understanding over typing a few less characters or having more elegant code.
Being able to use await in catch and finally must have been incredibly hard to implement for them. Especially in the finally part. I mean - I'm saying this as somebody who hasn't done a lot of C# or .NET work in the last few years, but think about what you would have to do if you had to implement this in a safe and bug-free way.