Some time ago I thought that Nullable<> value types are classes, encapsulating value types and a bool to HasValue. With som开发者_开发技巧e implicit cast operador for null, just implemented at BCL.
This lin开发者_JAVA技巧k explains the Encoder.GetBytes Method and there is a bool parameter called flush explained too . The explanation of flush is :
I am asking this because it seems like using Object seems to be an easy way out to solve certain problems, like \"I don\'t have a specific type, so use Object\", etc.
Is there a reason for this? I am asking because if you needed to use lots of empty chars then you get into the same situation as you would when you use lots of empty strings.
I was using Reflector to look at the implementation of String.Format and had always been under the impression that the overloads of String.Format that took 1, 2 & 3 arguments were optimized versio
In MSDN documentation, many .NET classes metho开发者_如何学运维ds (like ArrayList ) mentioned that \"Supported by the .NET Compact Framework\".
If the statement above is correct, then why when I use reflector on .Net BCL I see it is used a lot? EDIT: l开发者_开发百科et me rephrase: are all the GO-TO\'s I see in reflector written by humans or
AFAIK, ngen turns MSIL into native code (also reffered to as pre-JIT), however I never payed too much attention at it\'s startup performance impact. Ngen\'d applications still require the .NET base cl
We use .NET Web Services--both non-WCF and WCF, though the overwhelming majority is non-WCF, for legacy reasons--pretty heavily, and as I was testing something in Fiddler, I noticed that the response
I am attempting to store a variable length number that can have leading zeros as a part of that number.
加载中,请稍侯......