C# 9 - Record Types Introduction & Deep-Dive

[@ClaudioBernasconi]

What is your take on C# 9 Record Types? Will you use them? Why, or why not?

[@parthlearning6809]

Thank you for sharing this great knowledge

[@ClaudioBernasconi]

Thank you. 🙂

[@BijouBakson]

Thank you, that was useful.

[@ClaudioBernasconi]

Thank you. 🙂

[@BijouBakson]

@@ClaudioBernasconi I thank you even more for thanking me. Loop that :)

[@user-xg7hi5mh3g]

If the data does not change, we don't need to synchronise the access to it ?

[@msnotif294]

Hello. If I wanna to full clone a record. For example: var rec2=rec1 with { }; Is it the same as: var rec2=rec1; // is the 'with' necessary?

[@ClaudioBernasconi]

I don't think it's necessary in this case. The with clause allows you to make a copy of the record by providing new values for selected properties.

[@msnotif294]

@@ClaudioBernasconi Ok. Thank you

[@ajeetmalviya6280]

Which tool are you using to convert into IL?

[@ClaudioBernasconi]

Sharplab io

[@47Mortuus]

"var" is completely dead now (it has been before, too, because it is, by definition, less readable). instead of...: var person1 = new Person("John", "Adams"); write...: Person person1 = new("John", "Adams"); it is dead now, since the alternative is more readable (Datatype, variable name, assignment) and shorter than the var syntax. From now on, don't use a language feature unless you need it - so for var it would be limited to very few cases such as ArrayLists or whatever.

[@jkf16m96]

I don't get the statement "is completely dead now" Is it even discouraged or deprecated? Because I guess both options are compiled the same way, only 4 characters of difference (one space and "var") I think you're just exaggerating.