Skip to main content
deleted 8 characters in body
Source Link
Chris S
  • 65.2k
  • 53
  • 223
  • 240

Here's another linkHere's another link demonstrating how const isn't version safe, or relevant for reference types.

Summary:

  • The value of your const property is set at compile time and can't change at runtime
  • Const can't be marked as static - the keyword denotes they are static, unlike readonly fields which can.
  • Const can't be anything except value (primitive) types
  • The readonly keyword marks the field as unchangeable. However the property can be changed inside the constructor of the class
  • The readonly only keyword can also be combined with static to make it act in the same way as a const (atleast on the surface). There is a marked difference when you look at the IL between the two
  • const fields are marked as "literal" in IL while readonly is "initonly"

Here's another link demonstrating how const isn't version safe, or relevant for reference types.

Summary:

  • The value of your const property is set at compile time and can't change at runtime
  • Const can't be marked as static - the keyword denotes they are static, unlike readonly fields which can.
  • Const can't be anything except value (primitive) types
  • The readonly keyword marks the field as unchangeable. However the property can be changed inside the constructor of the class
  • The readonly only keyword can also be combined with static to make it act in the same way as a const (atleast on the surface). There is a marked difference when you look at the IL between the two
  • const fields are marked as "literal" in IL while readonly is "initonly"

Here's another link demonstrating how const isn't version safe, or relevant for reference types.

Summary:

  • The value of your const property is set at compile time and can't change at runtime
  • Const can't be marked as static - the keyword denotes they are static, unlike readonly fields which can.
  • Const can't be anything except value (primitive) types
  • The readonly keyword marks the field as unchangeable. However the property can be changed inside the constructor of the class
  • The readonly only keyword can also be combined with static to make it act in the same way as a const (atleast on the surface). There is a marked difference when you look at the IL between the two
  • const fields are marked as "literal" in IL while readonly is "initonly"
deleted 8 characters in body
Source Link
Chris S
  • 65.2k
  • 53
  • 223
  • 240

Here's another linkHere's another link demonstrating how const isn't version safe, or relevant for reference types.

Summary:

  • The value of your const property is set at compile time and can't change at runtime
  • Const can't be marked as static - the keyword denotes they are static, unlike readonly fields which can.
  • Const can't be anything except value (primitive) types
  • The readonly keyword marks the field as unchangeable. However the property can be changed inside the constructor of the class
  • The readonly only keyword can also be combined with static to make it act in the same way as a const (atleast on the surface). There is a marked difference when you look at the IL between the two
  • const fields are marked as "literal" in IL while readonly is "initonly"

Here's another link demonstrating how const isn't version safe, or relevant for reference types.

Summary:

  • The value of your const property is set at compile time and can't change at runtime
  • Const can't be marked as static - the keyword denotes they are static, unlike readonly fields which can.
  • Const can't be anything except value (primitive) types
  • The readonly keyword marks the field as unchangeable. However the property can be changed inside the constructor of the class
  • The readonly only keyword can also be combined with static to make it act in the same way as a const (atleast on the surface). There is a marked difference when you look at the IL between the two
  • const fields are marked as "literal" in IL while readonly is "initonly"

Here's another link demonstrating how const isn't version safe, or relevant for reference types.

Summary:

  • The value of your const property is set at compile time and can't change at runtime
  • Const can't be marked as static - the keyword denotes they are static, unlike readonly fields which can.
  • Const can't be anything except value (primitive) types
  • The readonly keyword marks the field as unchangeable. However the property can be changed inside the constructor of the class
  • The readonly only keyword can also be combined with static to make it act in the same way as a const (atleast on the surface). There is a marked difference when you look at the IL between the two
  • const fields are marked as "literal" in IL while readonly is "initonly"
fix link
Source Link
Chris S
  • 65.2k
  • 53
  • 223
  • 240

Here's another linkHere's another link demonstrating how const isn't version safe, or relevant for reference types.

Summary:

  • The value of your const property is set at compile time and can't change at runtime
  • Const can't be marked as static - the keyword denotes they are static, unlike readonly fields which can.
  • Const can't be anything except value (primitive) types
  • The readonly keyword marks the field as unchangeable. However the property can be changed inside the constructor of the class
  • The readonly only keyword can also be combined with static to make it act in the same way as a const (atleast on the surface). There is a marked difference when you look at the IL between the two
  • const fields are marked as "literal" in IL while readonly is "initonly"

Here's another link demonstrating how const isn't version safe, or relevant for reference types.

Summary:

  • The value of your const property is set at compile time and can't change at runtime
  • Const can't be marked as static - the keyword denotes they are static, unlike readonly fields which can.
  • Const can't be anything except value (primitive) types
  • The readonly keyword marks the field as unchangeable. However the property can be changed inside the constructor of the class
  • The readonly only keyword can also be combined with static to make it act in the same way as a const (atleast on the surface). There is a marked difference when you look at the IL between the two
  • const fields are marked as "literal" in IL while readonly is "initonly"

Here's another link demonstrating how const isn't version safe, or relevant for reference types.

Summary:

  • The value of your const property is set at compile time and can't change at runtime
  • Const can't be marked as static - the keyword denotes they are static, unlike readonly fields which can.
  • Const can't be anything except value (primitive) types
  • The readonly keyword marks the field as unchangeable. However the property can be changed inside the constructor of the class
  • The readonly only keyword can also be combined with static to make it act in the same way as a const (atleast on the surface). There is a marked difference when you look at the IL between the two
  • const fields are marked as "literal" in IL while readonly is "initonly"
added 18 characters in body; deleted 18 characters in body
Source Link
Chris S
  • 65.2k
  • 53
  • 223
  • 240
Loading
added 738 characters in body
Source Link
Chris S
  • 65.2k
  • 53
  • 223
  • 240
Loading
Source Link
Chris S
  • 65.2k
  • 53
  • 223
  • 240
Loading