Replies: 1 comment
-
A thought I had while reading the related discussion on the C# Discord, was it considered to have the field initialization be explicit to avoid the ambiguity? IE: record struct Rec(int Item)
{
public int Item { get; set => value < 0 ? throw new Exception() : field = value; field = Item; }
} It's not quite as terse, but I think it makes it more obvious you're assigning the field rather than invoking the setter. Should the team ever chose to pursue them, I think this would also evolve more elegantly towards property-scoped fields and/or having a different type for the backing field. (Assuming it doesn't create a parsing nightmare.) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/meetings/2022/LDM-2022-03-02.md
Agenda
field
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions