The implementation of anonymous methods in C# and its consequences (part 2)

re: The implementation of anonymous methods in C# and its consequences (part 2)

Carlos — Thu, 03 Aug 2006 17:41:04 GMT

It's easier to write:

DelegateB ConvertDelegate(DelegateA d)
{
return delegate { d(); };
}

Additionally, this also works if d is multicast. (Note that the new delegate is a deep copy: it isn't affected by changes to the original delegate's invocation list.)

The tradeoff is that it's cheaper to create the new delegate but more expensive to call it.

Interesting Finds: August 2

Jason Haley — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 06:25:58 GMT

Equivalence of delegates?

Grant Husbands — Sun, 06 Aug 2006 19:00:35 GMT

I know it's not the case, but shouldn't DelegateA and DelegateB be trivially the same type, anyway? (This is an open question - I'm not meaning to imply that you, Raymond, should know everything about every .NET design decision and I hope you don't mind me posting an open question, here.)

It certainly blocked me when I wanted to create a generics-based parameter-binding library, along the lines of boost::bind.

The implementation of anonymous methods in C# and its consequences

Eric Gunnerson's C# Compendium — Tue, 08 Aug 2006 20:23:53 GMT

Raymond wrote a really nice series of posts on this:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
He also points out that...

The implementation of anonymous methods in C# and its consequences #2

DotNetKicks.com — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 10:51:55 GMT

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

Anonymous Methods -> code bloat

Anonymous Methods -> code bloat — Mon, 14 Aug 2006 18:09:22 GMT

PingBack from http://blogs.dotninjas.dk/t4rzsan/archive/2006/08/14/1531.aspx

Tim Van Wassenhove » Blog Archive » Anonymous methods

Tim Van Wassenhove » Blog Archive » Anonymous methods — Sun, 17 Sep 2006 00:13:17 GMT

PingBack from http://timvw.madoka.be/?p=622

Tim Van Wassenhove » Anonymous methods

Tim Van Wassenhove » Anonymous methods — Sun, 08 Oct 2006 03:03:15 GMT

PingBack from http://www.timvw.be/anonymous-methods/

Julio C??sar Carrascal Urquijo » Archivo » D should have real closures.

Julio C??sar Carrascal Urquijo » Archivo » D should have real closures. — Thu, 13 Sep 2007 08:01:29 GMT

PingBack from http://jcesar.totumo.net/2007/09/13/d-should-have-real-closures/

New for Visual Studio 2008 - Support for anonymous methods and lambda expressions

The Visual Studio Code Analysis Team Blog — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:36:10 GMT

One of my favorite new features for Code Analysis in Visual Studio 2008 is our support for analyzing

Weekly linkdump #39 - max - ???????? ??????????????????????????

Weekly linkdump #39 - max - ???????? ?????????????????????????? — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 17:55:17 GMT

PingBack from http://www.developers.org.ua/archives/max/2006/08/04/weekly-linkdump-39/

ReSharper: Access to modified closure

Patrick Steele's .NET Blog — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 22:20:56 GMT

On the advice of Jay Wren , I decided to try our ReSharper 4.1 .  I had previously installed DevExpress

ReSharper: Access to modified closure

Patrick Steele — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 22:27:04 GMT

On the advice of Jay Wren , I decided to try our ReSharper 4.1 .  I had previously installed DevExpress'

For once and for all: Delegates, Events, Anonymous Methods and Lambda Expressions « Hungry for Knowledge

Thu, 21 May 2009 21:53:25 GMT

PingBack from http://sdesmedt.wordpress.com/2009/05/21/for-once-and-for-all-delegates-events-anonymous-methods-and-lambda-expressions/

Anonymous Methods Internals | Beyond The Spec

Anonymous Methods Internals | Beyond The Spec — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 02:52:18 GMT

PingBack from http://beyondthespec.com/blog/2009/06/19/anonymous-methods-internals/