Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

pjmlp

I was referring to:

- proper memory slices

- ability to do stackalloc in safe code

- readonly structs

- generics for blittable types

- zero allocation pipelines

- using without IDispose for structs without implicit boxing

- return scope for zero copy struct parameters

- native function pointers

- static lambdas

View on HN

If this is what you mean by "proper value types" then I think that the "value type" term is bloated. For me value types mean value semantics and what you describe are mostly optimizations. I like the point of Eric Lippert, that value types is not the same as "should live on stack" as a lot of people think.

I would agree that things like

> - using without IDispose for structs without implicit boxing

and

> - generics for blittable types

would make value types more "proper" in the C# language.

Value types without the optimizations I listed is what keeps people writing C++ instead of doing everything in .NET proper.

Just like C and C++ offer similar optimizations to avoid writing the tons of Assembly that was so common up to the mid-90's.

So yes, optimizations are definitly part of proper value types.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com