Hacker News Reader

Comment by woodrowbarlow | Hacker News Reader

> graphics.DrawRectangle(RedBrush, new(3, 5, 2, 2))

> graphics.DrawRectangle(RedBrush, new Point(3, 5, 2, 2))

what's the advantage of the first example? i prefer the second, because i don't have to look at the definition of DrawRectangle in order to know that the second argument is a 'Point' object.

View on HN

Someone in the comments also mentioned array initializers, arguably a better use of the feature.

this specifically.

new List<KeyValuePair<string,int>> { new (“a”, 1), new (“b”, 2) }

versus having to barf out the type name for every element will be REALLY nice.

The second argument is a Rectangle, which means you'd be repeating 'Rectangle' twice in one line with the second style.

I think this clarification proves his point, and I tend to agree that I prefer the more explicit, verbose style.

That's not obvious from the function name though. The function definition could easily be `DrawRectangle(SolidColor, CornerRadii, Point)` and you wouldn't know by seeing a bunch of `DrawRectangle(RedBrush, new(1,2,4,5), Point(4,5,2,2))` would you?

It's still nice to have the option in cases where it improves readability (maybe with named args or sth)

Tooling can show it. Rider will show it for you, I'm sure.

Saves some typing but it also has refactor implications too. If you change the parameter type, it would change the object being constructed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com