Specifically, I'm concerned about ".<>". What is that? I guess it's a
namespace, and so it's an empty one. That just seems wrong... like D
having "x..y" or "x.!()y", which it definitely doesn't have.
-[Unknown]
Christopher Wright wrote:
Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
I read until I hit this:
No, these are averages of run time. These are not the upfront costs,
but instead the average over 2 million calls or whatever.
For example, if DynamicMethod takes 2ms upfront (to compile the il,
although that seems way too long), it might still be smarter to use the
dynamic keyword even i
Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
I wonder what the overhead times were. He should've timed them both and
listed them separately. For example, is DynamicMethod a complete win,
or is the dynamic keyword cheaper as far as base cost?
Actually, he does. It's at the bottom of the "second look" post:
Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
I read until I hit this:
4. if (o__SiteContainer0.<>p__Site1 == null)
And I was suddenly hit with a huge feeling of "I'm glad D doesn't look
like this." Seriously, I hope this is some sort of decompiled syntax
and not actually valid.
It's decompiled: "This
Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
I read until I hit this:
4. if (o__SiteContainer0.<>p__Site1 == null)
And I was suddenly hit with a huge feeling of "I'm glad D doesn't look
like this." Seriously, I hope this is some sort of decompiled syntax
and not actually valid.
Yeah. I've been worri
I read until I hit this:
4. if (o__SiteContainer0.<>p__Site1 == null)
And I was suddenly hit with a huge feeling of "I'm glad D doesn't look
like this." Seriously, I hope this is some sort of decompiled syntax
and not actually valid.
I wonder what the overhead times were. He should'
A pair of short posts that show the "dynamic" keyword of C#4:
http://www.codethinked.com/post/2008/10/28/C-40-New-Features-Part-1-dynamic-keyword.aspx
http://www.codethinked.com/post/2008/10/28/C-40-New-Features-Part-11-dynamic-keyword-second-look.aspx
Bye,
bearophile
