When writing a method which takes a sequence, like void Foo(IEnumerable<int> bar), you sometimes want to call the method with a constant number of arguments like Foo(1, 2, 3). This requires you to write an additional void Foo(param int[] bar) => Foo((IEnumerable<int>) bar);.
This gets even worse if both versions are defined in an interface (which allows no default implementations), so each implementing class has the duplicate line of code void Foo(param int[] bar) => Foo((IEnumerable<int>) bar);.
An alternative to the varargs version is the array literal: Foo(new [] { 1, 2, 3 });. I really do not like this one, since the weird new [] can confuse quick readers and interrupt the flow and throught process of the person trying to understand your code.
So we propose a simple method IEnumerable<T> All<T>(param T[] elements) => elements;.
So the above call would look like: Foo(All(1, 2, 3)); or Foo(Seq(1, 2, 3)); depending on how we will call it. This fits perfectly into the goal of the CoreLibrary: To provide generic utilities which you do not have to reinvent yourself.
Suggested names:
All,Seq,Sequence, ...When writing a method which takes a sequence, like
void Foo(IEnumerable<int> bar), you sometimes want to call the method with a constant number of arguments likeFoo(1, 2, 3). This requires you to write an additionalvoid Foo(param int[] bar) => Foo((IEnumerable<int>) bar);.This gets even worse if both versions are defined in an interface (which allows no default implementations), so each implementing class has the duplicate line of code
void Foo(param int[] bar) => Foo((IEnumerable<int>) bar);.An alternative to the varargs version is the array literal:
Foo(new [] { 1, 2, 3 });. I really do not like this one, since the weirdnew []can confuse quick readers and interrupt the flow and throught process of the person trying to understand your code.So we propose a simple method
IEnumerable<T> All<T>(param T[] elements) => elements;. So the above call would look like:Foo(All(1, 2, 3));orFoo(Seq(1, 2, 3));depending on how we will call it. This fits perfectly into the goal of the CoreLibrary: To provide generic utilities which you do not have to reinvent yourself.