W3bbo said:
koistya said:

That's not the same thing, that's "properties for properties" which is just messed up in my opinion.


I'm perfectly happy with C# 2.0, I only rarely use C# 3.0 (and when I do, it's for Linq).


Wait a sec... this isn't an official blog posting, you're not an employee or someone involved in the language design process. Is this just an example you're proposing or what?

W3bbo, I am trying to make people think and be creative imagining the feature with me Wink