meetings/2022/LDM-2022-09-26.md
Today, we went through a significant portion of the current working set of items, and triaged them into a few categories:
required members, and we would like to extend the same
strategy to other larger items. For each such area, we'll create a working group to investigate all related issues.Importantly, we didn't get through everything in the working set today, so some of these categories are currently light. We'll finish our pass next meeting.
We already have an internal working group for this topic, and they will be continuing to work on it. Related issues:
This is one of the biggest things that we think will benefit from a smaller group to make design progress. There are a number of areas to investigate, as demonstrated by the open related issues:
closed type hierarchiesclosed enumsWe think there are two main subcategories here: the general feature of block expressions, and more specific improvements and unification of switch statements and expressions. Related issues:
We have a few issues related to general construction improvements, such as generalized support for factories, support for final initializers,
generalized with support, and others. Related issues:
with expressions
ref struct improvementsThere are three interrelated, major improvements that need to be done in parallel: ref structs implementing interfaces, ref structs in
generics, and ref fields to ref structs
where T : ref structparams improvementsThis doesn't need a full group, just a single dev to investigate and bring back a list of all the things to support in params. The Span<T>
is blocked on runtime support, but the other parts of the feature can proceed without waiting for it. Related issues:
params Span<T>params IEnumerableparams Span<T>params abilitiesparamsFinally, these are the issues that we don't feel need a working group to drive them.
field.field
default in deconstruction
params and string formatting