Alireza Habibi

This would be a lot more preferable than "edit the title to enable merge" experience. though the label of the choice could vary and not hard coded -- `do-not-merge`, `personal-review-only`,...

awaiting Task yields void so you can't assign it. for a value type I believe it'll be T?.

Since `return null` would still create a `Task` in an `async` method I also think making `await` a no op in case the expression is null is ok. However, it...

I think I gave the wrong impression. I was just pointing out an issue that would arise if we want to deliberately avoid `await?` syntax. I think it's not "extra...

"Any Time" milestone description: >We probably wouldn't devote resources to implementing this, but we'd likely accept a PR that cleanly implements a solution.

>The other question is whether readonly violations should fall under the same umbrella. And `init`. Initializaiton may not always fit inside the initializer syntax. That's where you want to go...

Previous discussion: https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/535

>This would not work with the current CLR spec, as stackalloc'ed memory cannot contain references. We could fallback to `Span(T[])` in that case (or basically, anywhere stackalloc is forbidden).

This ones mentioned in the prior thread, > ```cs > SomeType Foo(params int[] values); > SomeType Foo(params Span values); > ``` As discussed before, we don't need to define any...

@gafter params parameters with identical underlying types would give you a conflicting overload error, regardless of it being array or span (e.g. `int` in the example above). This is applicable...