Question

Is there any design reason for that (like the reason they gave up multi inheritance)?

or it just wasn’t important enough?

And same question applies for optional parameters in methods… this was already in the first version of vb.net… so it surely no laziness that cause MS not to allow optional parameters, probably architecture decision.. and it seems they had change of heart about that, because C# 4 is going to include that..

What was the decision and why did they give it up?

Edit:

Maybe readers didn’t fully understand me. I’m working lately on a calculation program (support numbers of any size, to the last digit), in which some methods are used millions of times per second.

Say I have a method called Add(int num), and this method is used quiet a lot with 1 as parameter (Add(1);), I’ve found out it is faster to implement a special method especially for one. And I don’t mean overloading – Writing a new method called AddOne, and literally copy the Add method into it, except that instead of using num I’m writing 1. This might seems horribly weird to you, but it’s actually faster.

(as much as ugly it is)

That made me wonder why C# doesn’t support manual inline which can be amazingly helpful here.

Edit 2:

I asked myself whether or not to add this. I’m very well familiar with the weirdness (and disadvantages) of choosing a platform such as dot net for such project, but I think dot net optimizations are more important than you think… especially features such as Any CPU etc.

Answer 1

To answer part of your question, see Eric Gunnerson’s blog post: Why doesn’t C# have an ‘inline’ keyword?

A quote from his post:

For C#, inlining happens at the JIT
level, and the JIT generally makes a
decent decision.

EDIT: I’m not sure of the reason for delayed optional parameters support, however saying they “gave up” on it sounds as though they were expected to implement it based on our expectations of what other languages offered. I imagine it wasn’t high on their priority list and they had deadlines to get certain features out the door for each version. It probably didn’t rise in importance till now, especially since method overloading was an available alternative. Meanwhile we got generics (2.0), and the features that make LINQ possible etc. (3.0). I’m happy with the progression of the language; the aforementioned features are more important to me than getting support for optional parameters early on.