[Mono-list] Object additional implicit operator.

Rolf Bjarne Kvinge rolflists at ya.com
Fri Aug 15 14:14:17 EDT 2008

> Sorry, I'll drop this point.
> It would have been really really simple when the language was conceived
> to consider that a simple test for object existance should not require the
> specification of a null constant; 

It would make things very weird, things like !((object) true)) would return

> nor should it require the extra overhead of a comparison operator.  A
really simple check for existance.

A few more characters generally make a language more explicit and easier to
understand, and it avoids weird issues like the above, which can be really
annoying if you stumble upon them.


More information about the Mono-list mailing list