HaloFour

@zahirtezcan > Also, why not just call it as `static interface` such as a `static class` and make it easier instead of all `static abstract` typing for lazy people like...

@najak3d That's not a case of extension methods being hackish, that's a case of using extension methods to hack C# to smell like some other language because you want the...

@najak3d > I'm glad we agree that the current methods used by MANY UI's is "hackish" (even Comet, I think is employing such a hack). No, I don't agree with...

@najak3d > Flutter/Dart is filling the gap and stealing market share in this domain (e.g. 400,000 new Flutter apps since 2018) Dart barely registers on the TiOBE index despite being...

@leo60228 It would support interfaces the same way that extension methods do now. @Joe4evr @Thaina The use of extensions here does not replace default method implementations anymore than extension methods...

There might also be a need to support them conceptually to permit deconstruction of zero and one element patterns, e.g. `Some(T)` and `None()`.

@scalablecory I like how Apple Swift does it. A single-element tuple (womple) is just an alternative syntax for a scalar value. An `(Int)` is just an `Int`, which kind of...

@YairHalberstadt > I think void should be the alias for the unit type (). `void` already means something quite different in C#, and is valid syntax in some scenarios where...

@Neme12 Tuples are only somewhat containers in the C# language. You have to dot into them out of necessity, but in some cases the language does (or will) treat them...

@IllidanS4 > Why should `where T : ref struct` imply `struct`? If this is an "anti-constraint" it should give you an option to use all types, classes and ref structs...