Specification for Nullable [Kit George]
I thought I'd make the Nullable specification available to everyone, for reference, and in order to allow you to ask any questions/issues. This is about to go through an ECMA review as well, so it should be interesting to see what their issues/comments are.
I've posted the specification on https://www.gotdotnet.com/team/clr/bcl/general/nullable2.doc. We'll continue to make more specifications available as we get closer to shipping!
Comments
- Anonymous
October 15, 2004
What is "cheops" ? - Anonymous
October 15, 2004
I cannot believe it has come to this...I am reading specs! - Anonymous
October 15, 2004
Aaaaah, Julia...
Think of it as advance documentation for the type ;-) - Anonymous
October 15, 2004
The comment has been removed - Anonymous
October 16, 2004
I love the idea of Nullable<T> as a null semantic for value types, however unless there is a compiler change I do not see the likelyhood of Nullable<T> being supported by the "as" keyword in c#.
Ideally, I should be able to use 'as' with Nullable<T> in the same way I would use it with a reference type.
e.g.
[c#]
object i = 1;
Nullable<int> j = i as Nullable<int>;
[/c#]
I had at one time heard that c# might also support Nullable<T> via a shortcut using the ? symbol, as in:
[c#]
?int i = null;
if(i.HasValue)
{
...
}
[/c#]
Is this still happening? And if so is there the possiblity of providing 'as' support? - Anonymous
October 16, 2004
appologize for the mistake, it was "int?" and I see that it's there. - Anonymous
October 17, 2004
Since Nullable<T> is a struct, does this mean we avoid boxing? - Anonymous
November 05, 2004
Since this is going in to ECMA, dust off your spelling checker. I found two typos just glancing through it (and others that Word green-underlined). Look for "underling" (instead of "underlying") and "Bt" (instead of "But").