Feature request: Implicitly typed lambdas

Currently, it is not possible to do this:

var x = () => 1;

Instead, you need to declare the type before:

Func<int> x = () => 1;

C# should just assume these kind of lambdas are either Action or Func and infer the type.

Usually these lambdas are used as helpers for the method implementation, so it really wouldn’t matter if a (string s) => true is a Func<string, bool> instead of a Predicate<string> as long as the signature matches.

[DustinCampbell]

Not a perfect solution, but remember that you can create aliases for closed generic type names when they get long:

using MyFunc = System.Func<Board, int, int, System.Generic.Collections.IEnumerable<Board>>; 

The later:

MyFunc newBoard = (int rows, int cols, IEnumerable<Board> previousGames) => { 
   // calculate a game board
   return new Board(data);
};

[MadsTorgersen]

This is one that we talk about often. VB has implicit types for delegates (not Func and Action but compiler generated ones), and quite liberal implicit conversions between delegate types.

We could do the same in C#, and maybe we should. One concern would be that the relative cost of these conversions might be on the highside, and invisible to users because of the implicit conversions.