🚀 go-pugleaf

I know one place I'll use anonymous methods - threads.  On occasion I want
to push some work off to a thread and have to create a separate method that
calls other methods.  It seems like such a waste to write the extra method
and I believe anonymous methods will make those situations a bit clearer.

Joe
-- 
Joe Mayo, Author/Instructor
Need C#/.NET training?
visit www.mayosoftware.com
C# Tutorial - www.csharp-station.com



"Jon Shemitz" <jon@midnightbeach.com> wrote in message
news:410573EE.7DA05388@midnightbeach.com...
> "Rudy Velthuis [TeamB]" wrote:
>
> > I know this is not eas,y since I'd somehow have to pass variables. I
> > would rather be using nested, but named methods instead. That way they
> > can even be reused. This is IMO not possible in C#.
>
> Nothing says you can't assign the anonymous method to a named
> delegate, but that does sort of defeat the point. There ARE plenty of
> times when you write a tiny method that's only used in one call-back;
> anonymous methods keep the code together, so you can read (and
> maintain) it with less jumping around.
>
> If there is some point to using the code in more than one place, then
> you DO you use a named method, that's all.
>
> -- 
>
> programmer, author  http://www.midnightbeach.com
> and father          http://www.midnightbeach.com/hs