Comments on: Making the ‘using’ statement, more usable http://jonfuller.codingtomusic.com/2009/02/25/making-the-using-statement-more-usable/ Fri, 04 Feb 2011 19:10:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Charlie Flowers http://jonfuller.codingtomusic.com/2009/02/25/making-the-using-statement-more-usable/comment-page-1/#comment-234 Charlie Flowers Thu, 02 Apr 2009 03:41:23 +0000 http://jonfuller.codingtomusic.com/?p=72#comment-234 Jon, this is good stuff too. Regarding where it should live and what it should be called ... here's an idea. It will be controversial, and truth is, I'm not 100% sold on it myself. But it's food for thought: Some things are so fundamental and likely to be used so commonly that they are almost like extensions to the language itself. Using those things should be easy and they should read "fluently" (in the general sense, not in the specific sense of "method chaining"). Maybe you put this in a static class named with one letter, like "X" for "eXtensions". This is sort of like how Prototype and now many JavaScript libraries use $. Jon, this is good stuff too. Regarding where it should live and what it should be called … here’s an idea. It will be controversial, and truth is, I’m not 100% sold on it myself. But it’s food for thought:

Some things are so fundamental and likely to be used so commonly that they are almost like extensions to the language itself. Using those things should be easy and they should read “fluently” (in the general sense, not in the specific sense of “method chaining”). Maybe you put this in a static class named with one letter, like “X” for “eXtensions”. This is sort of like how Prototype and now many JavaScript libraries use $.

]]>