Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 107647
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 11, 20262026-05-11T01:47:13+00:00 2026-05-11T01:47:13+00:00

I was looking at C# collection initializers and found the implementation to be very

  • 0

I was looking at C# collection initializers and found the implementation to be very pragmatic but also very unlike anything else in C#

I am able to create code like this:

using System; using System.Collections;  class Program {     static void Main()     {         Test test = new Test { 1, 2, 3 };     } }  class Test : IEnumerable {     public IEnumerator GetEnumerator()     {         throw new NotImplementedException();     }      public void Add(int i) { } } 

Since I have satisfied the minimum requirements for the compiler (implemented IEnumerable and a public void Add) this works but obviously has no value.

I was wondering what prevented the C# team from creating a more strict set of requirements? In other words why, in order for this syntax to compile, does the compiler not require that the type implement ICollection? That seems more in the spirit of other C# features.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. 2026-05-11T01:47:13+00:00Added an answer on May 11, 2026 at 1:47 am

    Your observation is spot on – in fact, it mirrors one made by Mads Torgersen, a Microsoft C# Language PM.

    Mads made a post in October 2006 on this subject titled What Is a Collection? in which he wrote:

    Admitted, we blew it in the first version of the framework with System.Collections.ICollection, which is next to useless. But we fixed it up pretty well when generics came along in .NET framework 2.0: System.Collections.Generic.ICollection<T> lets you Add and Remove elements, enumerate them, Count them and check for membership.

    Obviously from then on, everyone would implement ICollection<T> every time they make a collection, right? Not so. Here is how we used LINQ to learn about what collections really are, and how that made us change our language design in C# 3.0.

    It turns out that there are only 14 implementations of ICollection<T> in the framework, but 189 classes that implement IEnumerable and have a public Add() method.

    There’s a hidden benefit to this approach – if they had based it on the ICollection<T> interface, there would have been exactly one supported Add() method.

    In contrast, the approach they did take means that the initializers for the collection just form sets of arguments for the Add() methods.

    To illustrate, let’s extend your code slightly:

    class Test : IEnumerable {     public IEnumerator GetEnumerator()     {         throw new NotImplementedException();     }      public void Add(int i) { }      public void Add(int i, string s) { } } 

    You can now write this:

    class Program {     static void Main()     {         Test test              = new Test              {                 1,                  { 2, 'two' },                 3              };     } } 
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Ask A Question

Stats

  • Questions 51k
  • Answers 51k
  • Best Answers 0
  • User 1
  • Popular
  • Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to approach applying for a job at a company ...

    • 7 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to handle personal stress caused by utterly incompetent and ...

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    What is a programmer’s life like?

    • 5 Answers
  • added an answer You forgot to export that variable. Under bash: export QMAKESPEC=macx-g++ May 11, 2026 at 6:31 am
  • added an answer Check out GNU screen. It's kind of arcane and awkward… May 11, 2026 at 6:31 am
  • added an answer There are pros and cons to both approaches: Having an… May 11, 2026 at 6:31 am

Top Members

Trending Tags

analytics british company computer developers django employee employer english facebook french google interview javascript language life php programmer programs salary

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.