[Proposal] Referencing user-defined operators
See original GitHub issueMethodRef
contains brilliant static methods for referencing property getter/setter, constructor etc. But there is no way to reference user-defined operators, such as op_Implicit
. Could you please add methods for that?
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 3 years ago
- Comments:14 (6 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Feature Deep-Dive: User-Defined Operators
Have operators on types other than UDVTs. User-defined operators on reference types like structs or arrays are not allowed. It is not possible ......
Read more >[feature preview] User-defined operators - Feedback
User-defined operators are currently only meant to work with user-defined value types. We want to make them more ergonomic and as convenient as ......
Read more >Checked user defined operators - C# 11.0 draft feature ...
This feature enables checked and unchecked alternatives for some operators.
Read more >User-Defined Operators Including Name Binding for New ...
One promising approach uses user-defined operators. A user-defined operator is a function with user-defined syntax.
Read more >Looking for "User-defined operators for fun and profit"
has someone a pointer to "B. Stroustrup: "User-defined operators for fun ... http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/.
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
This is now available in v1.6.0.
@ltrzesniewski , general-purpose overload is good idea because the two methods may have the same signature and even the same return type but differs in
modreq
modifiers. From ECMA-335 point of view, this is the valid overload.