Re: Introducing "Array Of" RFC

>> Dictionary<int, string>[] foo <-- Is that *really* what you want an >> array of int->string dictionaries to look like? Really? > > Yes, i like this clean separation between base/scalar types and generics. We > can have this RFC *and* generics. Can't see any problems here. This is not > critique of your work or generics! > Eh... Makes one of us then. I think that syntax looks horrendous. Agree to disagree. > Discussed performance penalty got in long time before this RFC: > http://3v4l.org/os5Gg > That's not a discussion, that's a contrived benchmark, and a deeply flawed one since it amplifies general function call overhead and doesn't look at type-checking arbitrarily large arrays, let alone nested arrays. That benchmark was designed to lose any perf hit in the noise. > The only thing to solve is the nullable-issue... > Apart from performance and syntax. -Sara