9 comments

Join the discussion.

• 

  Stilgar Naib 15 minutes ago 2

  Collapse this comment Copy link

  Collection Expression Arguments feature is bullshit and you know it. Please when you design analyzers give us granularity so we won’t have to disable the analyzers suggesting collection expressions in general. (BTW the current analyzer wants me to use collection expressions in place of .ToList() on a LINQ query, which is of course stupid)

• 

  Paulo Pinto February 11, 2026 2

  Collapse this comment Copy link

  I really don’t get the point of Collection Expression Arguments.

  This syntax looks out of place in C#,

  // Initialize to twice the capacity since we'll have to add
  // more values later.
  List names = [with(capacity: values.Count * 2), .. values];

  And it is questionable of much this saves in typing, to the expense of getting the language one step closer to all the C++ gotchas, with special cased syntax.

  • 

    Dalibor Čarapić 4 hours ago 1

    Collapse this comment Copy link

    FYI people working on .NET have to release new versions every year and each new version has to add 'value' compared to the previous one.
    If they do not do that there is probably a high chance that MS would kill of .NET and move them to work on Azure or MS365.
    This situation forces them to add features which nobody would normally add if they had a choice.
    This is also why I'm highly skeptical about the future of .NET ... seems like a train where few people are screaming to go faster while all others are hanging for...

    Read more

    FYI people working on .NET have to release new versions every year and each new version has to add ‘value’ compared to the previous one.
    If they do not do that there is probably a high chance that MS would kill of .NET and move them to work on Azure or MS365.
    This situation forces them to add features which nobody would normally add if they had a choice.
    This is also why I’m highly skeptical about the future of .NET … seems like a train where few people are screaming to go faster while all others are hanging for their lives.

    Read less
    • 

      Paulo Pinto 3 seconds ago 0

      Collapse this comment Copy link

      Worse you cannot have a method called with, that you happen to call for that syntax.

    • 

      Stilgar Naib 14 minutes ago 0

      Collapse this comment Copy link

      They have enough work to do on union types and the traits feature (I think they called it shapes), features that are actually useful

    • 

      Dalibor Čarapić 2 hours ago 0

      Collapse this comment Copy link

      @Calvin Nel
      The question is why do we even have the [] syntax?
      What is wrong with:
      > List names = new();
      > names.AddRange(....);
      Is that one line so important to add additional complexity to the language and offer same functionality in 3 different ways?
      How are the new developers who want to learn .NET going to cope with '... oh, and you can do this in 3 different ways ... good luck remembering the syntax of each one ...'?

      If this syntax was introduced then why not immediately handle the edge cases such as this one or why not immediately...

      Read more

      @Calvin Nel
      The question is why do we even have the [] syntax?
      What is wrong with:
      > List names = new();
      > names.AddRange(….);
      Is that one line so important to add additional complexity to the language and offer same functionality in 3 different ways?
      How are the new developers who want to learn .NET going to cope with ‘… oh, and you can do this in 3 different ways … good luck remembering the syntax of each one …’?

      If this syntax was introduced then why not immediately handle the edge cases such as this one or why not immediately state that this syntax does not support constructor parameters (this is anyway such an edge case, how much code have you seen which even specifies the initial size in the collection constructors .. especially in this case where you are already initializing the collection to probably its final size!?)?

      Read less
    • 

      Calvin Nel 2 hours ago · Edited 0

      Collapse this comment Copy link

      to better understand what was done...
      you need to know what was changed.. so we know how we got here.

      before
      List names = new List();

      now
      List names = [];

      allowing the left hand side to change... while auto figuring out the right ( most modern lang do something simular-ish), so a requested feature, adding value)

      Now the question is how do you supply capacity with this new syntax? plus if there other options..., remember they not taking away the default syntax..

      if you have a better suggestion and it is widley seen as better im sure thats what would be adopted...
      saying...

      Read more

      to better understand what was done…
      you need to know what was changed.. so we know how we got here.

      before
      List names = new List();

      now
      List names = [];

      allowing the left hand side to change… while auto figuring out the right ( most modern lang do something simular-ish), so a requested feature, adding value)

      Now the question is how do you supply capacity with this new syntax? plus if there other options…, remember they not taking away the default syntax..

      if you have a better suggestion and it is widley seen as better im sure thats what would be adopted…
      saying things which dont offer a alterative while having a strong opinoin while solving nothing is not the most constructive.

      “This is also why I’m highly skeptical about the future of .NET … seems like a train where few people are screaming to go faster while all others are hanging for…”

      aposed to? which language is better with regards to new features while keeping pace with everyone else.

      what would you like to see?

      Read less
    • 

      Rand Random 3 hours ago 0

      Collapse this comment Copy link

      seems like someone read the book “conspiracy theory 101”

• 

  Renee GA February 10, 2026 0

  Collapse this comment Copy link

  CoreCLR on WebAssembly <— That's interesting, how do I test that?