The Least You Need to Know about C# 3.0

The Least You Need to Know about C# 3.0 (Beta 2 Edition)

DotNetKicks.com — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:12:43 GMT

You've been kicked (a good thing) - Trackback from DotNetKicks.com

re: The Least You Need to Know about C# 3.0

Jomo Fisher — Fri, 27 Jul 2007 20:17:02 GMT

Mark pointed out a mistake in the first section about multi-targetting. Indeed you can't query objects with LINQ against 2.0 because the extension attribute and extension methods are in System.Core.dll.

re: The Least You Need to Know about C# 3.0

Mark Miller — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 01:09:32 GMT

I really just thought there needed to be a clarification. You can query objects, but only if they have the standard query operators defined directly on them.

re: The Least You Need to Know about C# 3.0

Jomo Fisher — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 08:40:22 GMT

You're right, but I don't think people will find it that useful because the basic collections (array, list, etc) won't have those methods defined. At one point, I believe you could define your own ExtensionAttribute outside of System.Core.dll but it looks like this isn't possible in beta2.

re: The Least You Need to Know about C# 3.0

vardoubter — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:38:37 GMT

You mention the var keyword as being one of the features you consider most useful. Don't you think this makes code less readable? Yes, you can simply hover over a variable and obtain the type information you need but then that means while reading through code I need to continually keep hovering over the variables in order to truly understand the code. What does var really buy you, a few keystrokes? I'll take readability over a few more typed characters anyday.

re: The Least You Need to Know about C# 3.0

Jomo Fisher — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 01:31:09 GMT

Dear vardoubter,

I tend to use var in cases when the type would be redundant. Consider for example,

Dictionary<string, string> myDictionary = new Dictionary<string, string>();

Compared to:

var myDictionary = new Dictionary<string, string>();

I find the second to be more readable because the type is named only once. Also, I think its more maintainable because I only need to change the type in one spot.

I initially had trepidation about 'var' and extension methods for exactly the same reason as you mention. Having used the features for a year now, however, I think its fairly hard to unintentionally abuse either at the expense of readability.

Jomo

re: The Least You Need to Know about C# 3.0

jdee — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:55:39 GMT

Thanks for this. Very handy to know indeed! Expression trees are great!

re: The Least You Need to Know about C# 3.0

Jason Bock — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 15:33:52 GMT

vardoubter,

var is crucial for LINQ. The results/type returned from a query is anonymous; var makes it easy to use the result of a LINQ query without having to know its type. If you didn't have var LINQ would be really painful.

The Least You Need to Know about C# 3.0

C# — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:50:53 GMT

Here's a great overview of the goodies we can look forward to http://blogs.msdn.com/jomo_fisher/archive/2007/07/23/the-least-you-need-to-know-about-c-3-0.asp

linq and .net2

maxtoroq — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 05:14:01 GMT

You can use linq in .net2, just copy System.Core.dll to your Bin or GAC

Community Convergence XXIX

Charlie Calvert's Community Blog — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 09:36:22 GMT

There are several good new blogs from members of the community team. Nevertheless, the most important

Community Convergence XXIX

Charlie Calvert's Community Blog — Mon, 13 Aug 2007 09:39:50 GMT

There are several good new blogs from members of the Microsoft C# team. Nevertheless, the most important

re: The Least You Need to Know about C# 3.0

vik20000in — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 09:49:21 GMT

Check this post for anonymous Types

http://www.vikramlakhotia.com/New_Anonymous_Types_in_C_sharp_30.aspx

Want to learn LINQ? Learn some of the new language features first - it will pay off.

MSDN Ireland Blog — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 17:09:31 GMT

As you can probably tell from the title of my last few posts I've been doing some work with LINQ over

Want to learn LINQ? Learn some of the new language features first - it will pay off.

Ronan Geraghty's Weblog — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 17:09:32 GMT

As you can probably tell from the title of my last few posts I've been doing some work with LINQ over

Want to learn LINQ? Learn some of the new language features first - it will pay off.

.: Stefan Gabriel Georgescu's blog :. — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 17:46:42 GMT

As you can probably tell from the title of my last few posts I've been doing some work with LINQ over

re: The Least You Need to Know about C# 3.0

Jeff Collett — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 15:54:27 GMT

So using the Target Framework option can one build the same project for mutiple frameworks just by chaning the framework, then build?

Then make an installer?

The Least a C# Programmer Needs to Know about F# Part I--Implicit Types

Jomo Fisher -- C#, LINQ and Whatnot — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 22:32:44 GMT

Jomo Fisher--A few weeks ago, a fellow C# programmer asked me what the biggest differences between programming

The Least a C# Programmer Needs to Know about F# Part I--Implicit Types

Noticias externas — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 23:16:11 GMT

Jomo Fisher--A few weeks ago, a fellow C# programmer asked me what the biggest differences between programming

re: The Least You Need to Know about C# 3.0

Mark Miller — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 21:46:29 GMT

I've revisited this recently, and discovered that you CAN indeed declare your own ExtensionAttribute in beta 2 and still use extension methods while targetting v2.0. It just needs to be in the System.Runtime.CompilerServices namespace, and all will be happy.