Champion "Local Functions" (C# 7.0)

[gafter]

• Proposal added
• Discussed in LDM (2015-05-20, 2016-10-18, 2017-01-10)
• Decision in LDM
• Finalized (done, rejected, inactive)
• Spec'ed

See also

• Discussion: Local Functions roslyn#2930
• Proposal: Nested local functions and type declarations roslyn#259

[gafter]

This is a "proposal issue" because we need to add a proposal/spec to the repo.

[gulshan]

Should inferring return type for local functions in a later version of C# as mentioned here- dotnet/roslyn#2930 (comment) be discussed in a separate issue?

[bbarry]

separate; this is for the feature as it shipped in C#7

[lillo42]

I don't if here is the correct place for my question.

What is the naming convention for local function? PascalCase or camelCase

The roslyn project I saw camel case, but at Local Function Document use pascal case

[YairHalberstadt]

@Lilo42
I don't think Microsoft defines one. I'm guessing that since the members are not part of the public API they see no need to mandate consistency.

[CyrusNajmabadi]

The roslyn project I saw camel case

Roslyn-IDE uses PascalCase since these are viewed the same as methods, just placed inside the body of something.
Roslyn-Compiler uses camelCase since these are viewed as locals.

As you can see, even on hte Roslyn team there are differing opinions on which way is most appropriate. I personally prefer PascalCase as it lets me easily see if i'm invoking some local/parameter/delegate, versus invoking something that is actually a Function/Method.

As these are locals, there's not really going to be any strict guidance on how you name things as it's basically up to you.

[lillo42]

@CyrusNajmabadi and @YingdaBeyondsoft Thank you. I prefer PascalCase too.

[gafter]

Specification in progress at dotnet/csharpstandard#104.