Zev Spitz

@reduckted > Why even have a variable placeholder? Yes! This aligns quite naturally with VB.NET's syntax for calling optional parameters with later values filled in: ```vb foo.Bar(, , , ,...

> Maybe we should allow `foo(bar1, , , bar2, , bar3)` as well? @Berrysoft In what context do you want this syntax? Standard function calls already allow this.

Until tuple deconstruction is added, I use the following extension method (for a 2-tuple): ``` Function ForEach(Of T1, T2)(src As IEnumerable(Of (T1, T2)), action As Action(Of T1, T2)) For Each...

You can already work around this today. First, write a function with the appropriate behavior: ```vb Public Function StartsWithAny(s As String, ParamArray values() As String) As Boolean 'For the purposes...

@jrmoreno1 Could you clarify what you mean by an `IQueryable` function? Do you mean a function which returns an `IQueryable`? Because that is precisely how the standard LINQ methods work...

@VBAndCs > If I am looking for a workaround, then it easier to write a stored procedure to filter the names directly. It will need some work to use dynam9iic...

@Happypig375 There's an [article by Eric Lippert](https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/archive/blogs/ericlippert/not-everything-derives-from-object) that there are types in .NET that don't inherit from `Object`, such as interfaces and open generic parameter types. The answer, of course,...

``` If If(pgp?.IsOpen, False) Then ``` You can't elide the `If ... Then`; it's extremely unclear what the code is trying to do without it.

My understanding of the issue is as follows: with `Option Strict Off` and late binding, before the extension method's namespace is imported, `IsSomething` cannot be resolved at compile time, so...

(I hadn't realized this was a general question; I thought it was devoted to pointers etc.). My wishlist of features for VB.NET (from easier/more likely to harder/less likely): * Option...