Re: [RFC] [Discussion] Readonly class amendments

On 15 November 2022 19:23:44 GMT, "Máté Kocsis" <kocsismate90@gmail.com> wrote: >I didn't bother to add a separate example for explicit readonly properties, >because I mainly regard >readonly classes as a shorthand for adding the readonly modifier for all >properties My two cents: examples are cheap, misunderstandings are expensive. What you have now is like a test suite that only tests the happy path - the example doesn't demonstrate any of the details of the RFC. It would be really helpful to have an example, or a commented line of code in a bigger example, for each of the things this RFC will let you do, and some that it *won't* let you do, even for things that seem obvious to you, because they might not be obvious to everyone. Regards, -- Rowan Tommins [IMSoP]