If there's no way to reduce the number of events (by sharing events) then
you might have to just resort to using a timeout and polling or using a
separate thread to wait on each block of 64 events and then get those
threads to notify the main thread on one shared event.
> -Original Message
readability first, personally. It'd be alot easier to read
> > >
> > > public class Dictionary where KeyType :
> > > IComparable, ICollection, IAnotherThing, ValueType : IComparable,
> > > IDictionaryValue, IAnotherRestriction
> > >
> > &
uch larger, especially as the
> argument list starts to grow. Imagine 7 or 8 type arguments with
> constraints, unlikely as it may be, with ANY existing syntax...doesn't
> look
> pretty does it?
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Thong (Tum) Nguyen" &l
ryValue,
> IAnotherRestriction
>
> than
> public class Dictionary ValueType : IComparable, IDictionaryValue, IAnotherRestriction>;
>
> Beyond that, I imagine parsing is easier this way. It would be tough to
> determine what the second type name is, should it be named ICollection,
> IA
mparable, IEnumerable, ISomethingElse
>
> adam..
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Moderated discussion of advanced .NET topics. [mailto:ADVANCED-
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thong (Tum) Nguyen
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 5:50 PM
> > To: [EMAIL
Hey folks,
Can anyone think of a reason why the constraints syntax is this:
public class Dictionary where KeyType : IComparable
rather than this:
public class Dictionary
?
The former adds an additional (unreserved?) keyword to the language and
locates two related things apart from each other
