On Thursday, February 16, 2012 15:27:26 F i L wrote: > Marco Leise wrote: > > I'm just repeating what's already been said, but UFCS on > > classes and structs has the problem of ambiguities with proper > > methods of those. If 2.058 introduced more UFCS, then it is for > > literals. Try "123.foo;". > > C#'s had "UFSC" for years without ambiguity problems. Also, > "123.foo;" doesn't work.
C# doesn't have free functions. So, how could it have UFCS? - Jonathan M Davis
