Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

5
  • 10
    Great answer! It would be more accurate if Microsoft used the word infer instead of var, but for the sake of brevity, I think they picked the right one. After all these years, it still amazes me how elegant .NET is compared to other development technologies. I guess it's from Microsoft development teams having to eat their own dog food. BTW, if you use Resharper, the workings of var becomes immediately apparent. Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 18:21
  • 3
    @Joel, thank you, and yes, I find C# incredibly elegant. Eric Lippert and company did a great job. Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 18:36
  • @Joel: The only issue with C# is that it's C-based, and so brings with it many of the poor syntax-choices from C. Of course, if it wasn't C-based it wouldn't have nearly the adoption-rate, so that was the right choice... it was a problem with programming-society, not a mistake from the C#-designers :\ Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 19:15
  • 11
    Also, the var keyword in JavaScript does nothing with the variable type, but it does affect the variable scope. A variable declared without var becomes a global variable. One declared with the var keyword is local (in JavaScript, that is function scope, not block scope). Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 20:10
  • @Johan - very true. C# has no equivalent for implicit globals. Commented Dec 10, 2011 at 20:19