<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Only a few hours left (part 5)</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/cyrusn/archive/2005/09/13/464668.aspx</link><description>The previous post ended up showing that while visitors are available in C#, they lack usability brought by built in language constructs they could have that would make them an ideal choice to solve our problem. In Java, we saw that anonymous inner classes</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>re: Only a few hours left (part 5)</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/cyrusn/archive/2005/09/13/464668.aspx#465078</link><pubDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2005 00:17:42 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:465078</guid><dc:creator>BDog</dc:creator><description>Poo - poo.  Don't fight structure and make C# a scriptingesque language.</description></item><item><title>re: Only a few hours left (part 5)</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/cyrusn/archive/2005/09/13/464668.aspx#465186</link><pubDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2005 02:44:09 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:465186</guid><dc:creator>CyrusN</dc:creator><description>What makes you think this is Scriptingesque? </description></item><item><title>re: Only a few hours left (part 5)</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/cyrusn/archive/2005/09/13/464668.aspx#465371</link><pubDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2005 07:14:15 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:465371</guid><dc:creator>Stuart Ballard</dc:creator><description>&amp;quot;var&amp;quot; makes it look scriptingesque (although of course it isn't really since the values really are statically typed).&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But you didn't use var in your example so I'm not sure what BDog is referring to.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Incidentally can you use &amp;quot;var&amp;quot; to infer the type of a property or the return value of a method? All the following vars would resolve to int except the last one which would be IEnumerable&amp;lt;int&amp;gt;...&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;private var foo = 1;&lt;br&gt;public var Foo {get {return foo;} set {foo = value;}}&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;public var getFoo() {&lt;br&gt;  doSomeStuff();&lt;br&gt;  return 1;&lt;br&gt;}&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;public var getAllFoos() {&lt;br&gt;  for (var i = 0; i &amp;lt; 10; i++) {&lt;br&gt;    yield return i;&lt;br&gt;  }&lt;br&gt;}</description></item><item><title>re: Only a few hours left (part 5)</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/cyrusn/archive/2005/09/13/464668.aspx#467050</link><pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2005 08:57:09 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:467050</guid><dc:creator>CyrusN</dc:creator><description>Stuart: Nope.  Right now &amp;quot;var&amp;quot; is just for &amp;quot;*local* variable type inference&amp;quot;.  But it appears like you'd like ot see it elsewhere.  I'll definitely bring that feedbak to the language design meetings!</description></item></channel></rss>