Welcome to MSDN Blogs Sign in | Join | Help

Updated C# V2.0 Specifications now available

After a lot of work on Anders' part, we now have an updated version of the C# 2.0 Language Specification on the website.

Not only does it have updated information on the “big 4” - Generics, iterators, anonymous methods, and partial classes, but it also has new information on a few other areas.

The biggest one is nullable types, which are a new way to creating nullable versions of value types and specialized language syntax to support using these types. There are also a few “miscellaneous” ones, the most awaited one surely being different accessability on property getters and setters.

Published Monday, May 24, 2004 10:05 AM by ericgu
Filed under: ,

Comments

Monday, May 24, 2004 10:59 AM by Oskar Austegard

# re: Updated C# V2.0 Specifications now available

On the topic of Nullable Types - looking at the specs it looks remarkably similar to luKa's project at http://nullabletypes.sourceforge.net/, but of course with the benefit of the new ? moderator.

Will nullable types now (in 2.0) be used in generated code (like typed datasets for nullable table columns instead of the cumbersome IsMyColumnNull() constructs)?
Monday, May 24, 2004 2:08 PM by the blog of michael eaton

# New C# 2.0 Spec released

Monday, May 24, 2004 11:24 AM by Li Jianzhong

# The Nullable Type hurts the chastity & simplicity of the programming language

I don't think the Nullable Type is a good design ,although inventing it has a good reason. To tell the truth, I had been bothered by this kind of problem.

But from the view point of one programming language, I think this hurts its chastity & simplicity (although not so much).

If we need a built-in construct to support the database operation, why not we need a built-in construct to support the network operation? why not we need a built-in construct to support the COM+ , or AOP?

I prefer to using a good design class library to provide the solution.
Monday, May 24, 2004 11:35 AM by Oskar Austegard

# re: Updated C# V2.0 Specifications now available

How does the introduction of nullable versions of value types affect operations that previously required reference types because they might result in null? The as operator comes to mind - from the 2.0 specs:

20.8.6 The as operator
The as operator can be used with a type parameter T as the right hand side only if T is known to be a reference type (§?20.7). This restriction is required because the value null might be returned as a result of the operator.
Monday, May 24, 2004 2:43 PM by Girish Bharadwaj

# Updated C# 2.0 Specs

Monday, May 24, 2004 1:24 PM by Luc Cluitmans

# re: Updated C# V2.0 Specifications now available

Is there a list of changes since the October 2003 version of the document available?

I noticed my pet peeve of the 'new()' contraint not allowing arguments was not addressed (as far as I could see), but I was wondering what things *did* change...
Monday, May 24, 2004 2:21 PM by RichB

# re: Updated C# V2.0 Specifications now available

The class modifiers also lists 'new' as a modifier - what is this intended to do?
Monday, May 24, 2004 3:01 PM by (luKa)

# re: Comments on nullable types specs

I like C# 2.0 nullable types spec.

The comments on what I like, a suggestion for improvements and a comment on the Tread-off between changing C# syntax or using an external library for nullable types is in the gotdotnet forum:
http://www.gotdotnet.com/Community/MessageBoard/Thread.aspx?id=226971&Page=1#226971



Ciao from Italy, (luKa)

http://nullabletypes.sf.net/
http://dev.luca.minudel.it/
http://www.luca.minudel.it/eng/
Monday, May 24, 2004 6:23 PM by Robert Hurlbut's .Net Blog

# C# 2.0 Language Specifications Updated

Monday, May 24, 2004 6:33 PM by Skerkles the Coding Clown

# Updated C# 2.0 Specification Released

Monday, May 24, 2004 4:20 PM by Keith Farmer

# re: Updated C# V2.0 Specifications now available

Nifty, but now I have reason to grumble.

So can those of us who purchased the Feb 2004 of the specs get vouchers for the final print version?

It *would* be nice, given the lack of warning that exists on other books, that the contents were subject to a 30% increase in 2.0-related material.

I even still have my receipt from 30 April.
Tuesday, May 25, 2004 9:43 AM by Sam Gentile's Blog

# New and Notable 57

Tuesday, May 25, 2004 2:14 PM by Sam Gentile's Blog

# New and Notable 57

Tuesday, May 25, 2004 3:04 PM by { Gerd's } .NET Blog

# Neue C# 2.0 Spezifikationen ver

Wednesday, May 26, 2004 11:00 PM by The Pedant

# re: Updated C# V2.0 Specifications now available

Sorry to be pedantic, but Anders is a single entity (we hope), so it should be: "a lot of work on Anders's part".
Thursday, May 27, 2004 4:04 PM by Eric

# re: Updated C# V2.0 Specifications now available

Luc,

I'm sorry - there is no change list between the documents. I'll see if that's something we could do in the future.

Eric
Thursday, June 03, 2004 3:13 PM by wy6688

# re: Updated C# V2.0 Specifications now available

I have asked a new feature before, named as
property array.

In C#, we have this [int index] as default
property array.

this [int index]
{
get {}
set {}
}

I think it should add a name property array

NamedProperty [int index]
{
get {}
set {}
}
Tuesday, June 08, 2004 3:21 PM by Ohad's WebLog

# C# Language Specification Updated

Tuesday, June 08, 2004 6:54 PM by Eric Newton

# re: Updated C# V2.0 Specifications now available

property array: doesnt VB.Net have that?

The Pendant: if you're gonna point out grammer errors, at least make sure YOUR grammer is correct: the correct usage would be "Anders'".

I like Nullable types, mainly because I was irritated that .Net as a framework came out AFTER the proliferation of Database engines as primary storage mechanisms instead of object serialization to files of yesteryear, and since the Databases had the notion of int fields with "No valid data" ie NULL, I always felt shortchanged when I had to use an int property and set it to ZERO when the db field was null, and the semantics of the SqlTypes just kinda didnt work well...

so bravo again on nullable types, in addition to generics and so forth!

I admire Anders' work... [and everybody else who's helping out]
Thursday, August 05, 2004 5:03 AM by 成人论坛

# re: Updated C# V2.0 Specifications now available

http://www1.12322.com
http://www.caobb.com
Tuesday, December 28, 2004 4:55 AM by RebelGeekz

# Re:

[http://itpeixun.51.net/][http://aissl.51.net/][http://kukuxz003.freewebpage.org/][http://kukuxz001.51.net/][http://kukuxz003.51.net/][http://kukuxz005.51.net/][http://kukuxz002.51.net/][http://kukuxz004.freewebpage.org/][http://kukuxz007.51.net/][http://kukuxz001.freewebpage.org/][http://kukuxz006.51.net/][http://kukuxz002.freewebpage.org/][http://kukuxz004.51.net/][http://kukuxz008.51.net/][http://kukuxz009.51.net/][http://kukuxz005.freewebpage.org/][http://kukuxz006.freewebpage.org/][http://kukuxz007.freewebpage.org/][http://kukuxz009.freewebpage.org/]
New Comments to this post are disabled
 
Page view tracker