#ponce Wrote:
> It's a bit unclear to me.
>
> I know I must compare references with is but pointers ?
Thanks for asking this question ponce; I've been getting into the habit of
using 'is' for both pointers
and classes, so in similar vein to ponce's question, I'd like to ask if the
following (where foo is
eother a pointer of class ref) is being overly pendantic in the case of null if
tests:
if (foo !is null) {
// can do something with foo
}
as opposed to the shorter form, but possibly incorrect or less safe
if (foo) {
// can do somthing with foo
}
I think I would prefer the shorter form if its 100% good.
Thanks all.
