Joe4evr

> See https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/meetings/2017/LDM-2017-12-04.md So that link does not talk about `partial` *anywhere* (as @CyrusNajmabadi noted), so I did a quick search for the paper trail myself: * https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/meetings/2017/LDM-2017-09-27.md (which was...

I wonder if the ASP.NET team would lean their preference to `@{` since that's already established for a statement block in Razor syntax. 🍝

> If we don't specify/implement it carefully, item1 will start binding to the parameter and the code will no longer compile. Is it possible to specify it'll only bind to...

> Allow `nameof` to reference parameters with the method name as a qualifier `[Attr(nameof(M.p))] void M(int p) { }` Funny thing, I thought of *this exact option* to be the...

Maybe not entirely related, but probably worth discussing in this context: Is it possible to start emitting `enum`s as a `readonly` type? Admittedly, that may be a bit much. Currently,...

[Also related.](https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/issues/5883#issuecomment-153798232)

This is a language proposal, not a framework/runtime proposal. Language changes should be proposed at [dotnet/csharplang](https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues). But on top of that, I don't see this being considered because it changes...

@chrisaut It's not about it being a breaking change to allow this; it's that doing this makes **the simple act of changing a block to `unsafe` in the future** breaking....

> This would apply to methods and properties, and be supported in classes and interfaces. The part about support in interfaces, does this mean something like the following? ```cs public...

Reading the [raw notes](https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/meetings/2017/LDM-2017-10-18.md#100): > It may be that there's a subset of the feature that's simpler. We would need that subset to not preclude going further later. Looking at...