Unrestricted types, only checking member extensions #8370
Unanswered
zms9110750
asked this question in
General
Replies: 1 comment
-
I believe that would fall under extension implementation: #5497 I expect that it would require at least specifying the extension, although perhaps the compiler can automatically wire up the compatible members. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
be similar to
arr[ .. ]
only needCount
andSlice
.foreach
only needGetEnumerator
,and no matter what this method returns, as long as the return value hasCurrent
,MoveNext
.Many engines have a vector. If I write extension methods for them, only for this type.
I'm not sure if using interface bridging will cause boxing or any other performance issues.
I think it would be great if the extension method written could be used for any type with X and Y members.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions