On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Josh Suereth <joshua.suer...@gmail.com> wrote:Looks good to me. I'd avoided the use of a dependent method type (ie.
> I decided to clean up the collection extension method mechanism so that it:
> Had less sprawl
> Just wanted to grab some folks attention/opinions (especially Miles) on that
the result type of fr.A) to allow for 2.9.x compatibility and because
it's maybe not a completely familiar idiom to expect collections
extensions writers to use. But if it's OK on both those counts then I
think it improves things on balance.
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.