Joseph Musser

> That'd be my preference, I can't imagine it's remotely common to find developers using `@value` to refer to the `value` parameter in property setter accessors. I see `@` used...

There was a community request for this exact issue description at . Also, it would enable `Memory` (which has no GetEnumerator) to add `[CollectionBuilder]` and be targeted by collection expressions...

@wanton7 So what you do is the same thing you do for string.Format: offer more specific overloads with the most common number of parameters.

In C# 9, you can do `if (x is 1 or 2 or 3) {`.

@cston @CyrusNajmabadi @RikkiGibson I believe this documents an LDM decision that was implemented when the feature originally shipped. I'm not sure where to take this next, can anyone help?

Updated!

@miniBill Yes.

@fubar-coder I'm curious, does that ever make a difference besides being annoying if you ever refactor to being non-abstract?

> `public` on an abstract class doesn't make sense, because you cannot instantiate this class using this publicly visible constructor Sure it does, as much sense as public members on...

Could this be extended to work in switch expressions, a natural evolution from conditional expressions? ```cs // Already works public string ValidationMessage => validationResult?.IsError(out var errorMessage) is true ? errorMessage...