<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: C#/F#: Using .NET framework classes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/2009/06/16/cf-using-net-framework-classes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/2009/06/16/cf-using-net-framework-classes/</link>
	<description>Thoughts on Software Development</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:17:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Needham</title>
		<link>http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/2009/06/16/cf-using-net-framework-classes/comment-page-1/#comment-18731</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Needham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 11:54:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/?p=1337#comment-18731</guid>
		<description>I used it once and got told off! Probably should have investigated further as to why it&#039;s not considered a good idea.

I&#039;m thinking it would be around the fact that it&#039;s not obvious that the result would be put into a parameter although I guess you could equally argue that&#039;s what the out parameter is there to describe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I used it once and got told off! Probably should have investigated further as to why it&#8217;s not considered a good idea.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m thinking it would be around the fact that it&#8217;s not obvious that the result would be put into a parameter although I guess you could equally argue that&#8217;s what the out parameter is there to describe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tim Robinson</title>
		<link>http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/2009/06/16/cf-using-net-framework-classes/comment-page-1/#comment-18730</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Robinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 11:43:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markhneedham.com/blog/?p=1337#comment-18730</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t understand the problem with out parameters. I have a co-worker who says the same thing: that out parameters are frowned upon, so you shouldn&#039;t use TryGetValue. Although FxCop complains if you write an out parameter into one of your own methods, the Framework Design Guidelines book advocates this exact TryGetValue pattern.

I agree F#&#039;s bool * string approach is neater; it forces you to handle the case when TryGetValue returns false. (Although if TryGetValue had been written in F#, I guess it would have returned Option).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t understand the problem with out parameters. I have a co-worker who says the same thing: that out parameters are frowned upon, so you shouldn&#8217;t use TryGetValue. Although FxCop complains if you write an out parameter into one of your own methods, the Framework Design Guidelines book advocates this exact TryGetValue pattern.</p>
<p>I agree F#&#8217;s bool * string approach is neater; it forces you to handle the case when TryGetValue returns false. (Although if TryGetValue had been written in F#, I guess it would have returned Option).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

