谁能给我一个很好的理由使用CLR类型名称，而不是代码的C＃类型名称（别名）（作为一般的做法）？ [英] Can anyone give me a REALLY good reason to use CLR type names instead of C# type names (aliases) in code (as a general practice)?

问题描述

我们有一点战斗在我们的开发团队在这个事情。我很想听听别人怎么想这个问题。

We have a bit of a battle going on in our development team over this. I would love to hear what others think about this.

推荐答案

在实际的代码？不，除非你将有很多的人谁是熟悉.NET但与C＃代码工作。

In the actual code? No, not unless you're going to have lots of people working on the code who are familiar with .NET but not with C#.

在成员名字？绝对。例如，假设 Convert.ToSingle 被称为 Convert.ToFloat - 这将是F＃开发人员完全混乱，对于其中浮动是指64位浮点。

In member names? Absolutely. For instance, suppose Convert.ToSingle had been called Convert.ToFloat - that would be totally confusing for F# developers, for whom "float" means "64 bit floating point".

我的一般原则是实现C＃别名，CLR类型成员的名称。

My general rule is C# aliases for implementation, CLR types for member names.

如果你想找到一些论点支持无处不使用CLR类型名称，杰夫里氏建议，通过C＃CLR。 （如果你还没有得到它，买一本不管这件事情 - 这是一个奇妙的书）。我没跟他提出的论点一致，但也有一些在那里，反正

If you want to find some arguments in favour of using the CLR type names everywhere, Jeff Richter recommends that in "CLR via C#". (If you haven't already got it, buy a copy regardless of this matter - it's a wonderful book.) I didn't agree with the arguments he put forward, but there are some there, anyway.

这篇关于谁能给我一个很好的理由使用CLR类型名称，而不是代码的C＃类型名称（别名）（作为一般的做法）？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！