That's true, but you never would, with or without linq. That is because IEnumerable does not have such a property.
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 4:55 PM, James Chapman-Smith <[email protected] > wrote: > LINQ doesn't cause `.Length` to disappear, but if you assign the array to > an `IEnumerable<T>` then you won't seen the `.Length` property. > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Tristan Reeves > *Sent:* Wednesday, 16 February 2011 11:54 > > *To:* ozDotNet > *Subject:* Re: LINQ extensions > > > > But Length is always a (valid) property of arrays, whether or not LINQ is > reference. Or are you saying that Length "disappears" when LINQ is > referenced? > > > > Tristan. > > On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Ian Thomas <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Michael – slip of the fingers – yes, it was a .Count method (when LINQ is > referenced), and a .Length property (when not). Not weird, lang c# > > > ------------------------------ > > Ian Thomas > Victoria Park, Western Australia > ------------------------------ > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Michael Minutillo > *Sent:* Tuesday, February 15, 2011 1:20 PM > *To:* ozDotNet > *Subject:* Re: LINQ extensions > > > > Weird. It should add a .Count() extension method, not a property. Are you > coding in a language that has optional parentheses by any chance? > > On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Ian Thomas <[email protected]> > wrote: > > FYI only > > Just an oddity I hadn’t taken in before, that a reference to LINQ makes > .Count a valid property of arrays (otherwise .Length is valid). > > I had been using LINQ to Objects in a small projects and changed it to not > do so, meticulously cleaned references to LINQ out (VS2008 does not seem to > do that thoroughly), and had a couple of errors arise with myarrays.Count > statements I had been slack enough to write previously. > > Framework 3.5 > ------------------------------ > > Ian Thomas > Victoria Park, Western Australia > > > > >
