Repository navigation
Replies: 2 comments
|
Yeah, we need to look at how we support C# 9 and even nullable reference types properly. One issue for us is backwards compatibility. For now, in a related example, it may make more sense for us to target LTS releases of .NET, so 6 vs 5. When looking at new language feature support i.e. treating a message as a record type, we need to think about breaking folks who are not using C# 9 yet. So it needs some thought to understand their experience |
0 replies
|
@zlavoie Do you know anything about the backward compatibility of C# 9 init properties, I have not had a chance to look |
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.
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
C#9 came out with records and init-only properties. So now when trying to implement records, I am limited to using 'set' in IRequest.
Describe the solution you'd like
If the Id of IRequest can be init instead of set, then it can be used in a record and the comand can be fired to the handler.
Describe alternatives you've considered
I could use set, and then that is the only property that is NOT immutable, which starts to violate the purpose of a record in C#9.
All reactions