6 C# keywords you (probably) never had to use 

and the parens around *pointer are needed due to operator precidence

This is old news for anyone with the smallest amount of experience in C or C++

more formally, it's not "getting an int", but rather dereferencing for you

@@pxolqopt3597 It's news to us who never touched C or C++(whose file type is called cpp) even after seeing C and C++ code several times.

_takes your hand_ join me in the dark side for real though C is addicting, you should try it some time

@@unsafecast3636 nah. Lack of normal build system and package manager kills any motivation to write anything more serious than helloworld's in it.

@@Xotchkass i think youre forgetting about cmake, conan & vcpkg

Damn I didn't know that people still do C# to C++ interop. That just blows my mind.

@@nickchapsas we do it to cheat in videogames of course... You can inject a .net CLR into an unmanaged process and detour between your unmanaged, into your managed space and back out. Could be used for monitoring tools as well I guess?

@@nickchapsas I use interop in mobile xamarin projects, we have some library implementing digital signature and encryption in GOST algorhytm, it is implementing Microsoft C++ CryptoApi, only way to use it on mobile is via interop. Only things I use for it is Marshal class and sequental layouted structs.

@@nickchapsas well i'm writing a C++ library for unity, so most of these things have at least cropped up at some point, though we do our best to limit it, since it does add a lot of complexity

​@@nickchapsas try calling a Win32-API...

Funny enough, volatile is in the part 2 of this video :D

Same thing that poped in my head lol

I don't think volatile is applicable to this topic. I completely agree about all that unsafe stuff, it is almost never needed even if you sometimes work with unmanaged code like me. But volatile is not about low level code, it is about thread-safety in high level code, many people use it because it is more convinient way than explicitly using Interlocked class.

@@iGexogen The topic isn't about low level code. It's about keywords that you don't usually see used in C#. I just happened to have grouped many low level stuff in one video to help it be easily consumed.

@@nickchapsas It will be interesting to see how many of commentators actually use volatile, I think that unity guys must be using advanced multi-threading. It was suprising for me that you never needed it, I suppose lock statements and concurrent collections is enough for all your async purposes. Waiting for part 2)

Really solid explanation. Thank you.

I agree mostly, with the exception of your last remark. I use right-aligned operators too, but I also understand why people use left aligned operators. Especially in businesses where multiple declarations in a single line are forbidden in their coding standard (a lot of companies have this as a rule). I would argue that aligning them to the left can make it a lot more clear to the reader what a variable or member can contain, there is a lot of debate of semantics versus technicality here. Saying someone does not understand how it works because you do not agree with their choices, is not a constructive point. I have had people that designed compilers explain to me why they used left aligned.

@@BGroothedde I guess I was being a little too general here. But 90% of the time, people put it on the left because they don't understand the implications of it. Maybe not in a job setting, but when people make the decision themselves. We can argue about good practice, but that never ends well. My stance on style is just to do what the project you're joining already does, so if a company puts the star on the left, I'll do that too. But if you see a star on the left in a personal project, it's an _indication_ that they lack some understanding of the language. But frankly, I was unaware that some companies do it, because it is imo just incorrect, the star belongs to the declarator. But if you don't ever group declarations (which I also don't do), then it might not matter so much.

Saying the star is not part of the type in c++ is nonsense. If that was the case, std::is_pointer and std::is_pointer should return the same value. Obviously they don’t and there are plenty of other examples where in type contexts whether something is a pointer type or not matters. I get what you are saying about multiple variable declarations, but I would contend that is a defect of the parsing rules of the language. In all other cases, you need to consider pointer/reference as part of the type of the variable.

@@deanjohnson8233 I don't think you understood what I said. Of course it is part of the type whether something is a pointer or not. But in the declaration statement, the star is not part of the token that describes the type, which is proven by the example I supplied. Also, a defect? It would be incredibly easy to "fix" if it was. It's by design.

@@lorinatzberger3624 Imo the clickbait would be more enticing if it wasn't blurred.

@@lorinatzberger3624 Fair point

In the C# language specification, section "22.7 The fixed statement" it says: A char* value produced by fixing a string instance always points to a null-terminated string. Within a fixed statement that obtains a pointer p to a string instance s, the pointer values ranging from p to p + s.Length ‑ 1 represent addresses of the characters in the string, and the pointer value p + s.Length always points to a null character (the character with value '\0').

And it can also be used with struct which I wanted to show but I totally forgot 🤦‍♂️

My first thought was interop, though I didn't know this word for it. Otherwise my second was creating your own little compress program. Taking all the variables into an array of pointers. Go through each pointer and look for the same char or int in the same spot. Put that char/int in it's own struct variable along with it's place in the pointer, and remove it from the original variables. Then to zip it up. Just run a function that takes the struct and puts the char/int into the coordinate place given. Can probably do that better using a dictionary but I just thought of a struct for simplicity. Probably a poorly optimized mess of a program that takes more memory than anything but I just liked to think up the concept of a zip compress program yourself by reducing the address values.

C sharp generally doesn't run in contexts that have access to memory mapped hardware.

I actually learned about Unsafe code because of unity, Though I didn't know about stackalloc.

It's checked at compiler time, so I sometimes have to do const int Default = unchecked(0xCA7F00D1); At runtime it is unchecked unless the compiler option CheckForOverflowUnderflow is set.

A tool such as...? I don't need to do it often, but it's always a pain when I do.

Guess what those tools use under the hood. ;-)

Wow, in C#?

I know a little bit why you would use it. But then... WHY?

Lol i only got one right 😅

You technically got Global right as well. It will be in part 2 :D

You! Get back here! :-)

It's hardly legacy code. Pointers are useful for interop and low level performant code. In dotnet5/C# 9 we've also now got function pointers. Stackalloc also returns a raw pointer by default, that's why he wrote "Span" instead of just "var".

​@@igorthelight muhahah and now I build an undocumented nuget package and use botnets to download it constantly so its always on top of search results xD

@@Terrados1337 Ha-ha :-)

What did you use it for?

There is no doubt in my mind that coding like this would yield great performance gains but it comes with a lot of shortcomings. Code needs to be easy to maintain, easy to work with and easy to get new hires to work on. As a hiring manager myself, I can guarantee that if I was using all those keywords in our codebase then it would be impossible to hire engineers. And at the end of the day, it is way easier to scale an app out to 100 stateless instances than optimize that single codebase.

@@nickchapsas in general - yes. But sometimes ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7GTpwgsmHgU.html

Or couldn't you just use dll import? I've never had an issue using dll import to use my c++ functions. Barely ever used it but it works. Not sure on the limitations though

@@Ownage4lif31 right now it can be. Ten years ago when I made some wrappers over few Delphi libraries I had to do that. One of the libraries was a protocol over TCP/IP and I had some issues about how data types are stored. Honestly speaking I don't remember exactly what was the issue but when an c# app send the data to our delphi ecosystem apps it was received corrupted. Happy codding!

420

Dynamic is very common still, mainly due to packages like Dapper

malloc in C allocates on the heap. Stackalloc is like c arrays. E.g signed int numbers[3] = {4,2,0};

`malloc` in C allocates memory on the heap, not on the stack.

"stackalloc" is like "malloca" from C I believe. And you have to be extremely careful with it since it will become deallocated the moment you return from the enclosing function and drop the stack frame. If you want data allocated on the stack, use a struct. That's what those are for.

Regarding "heapalloc", I believe that it just does what "malloc" would do in most cases. (And I believe it's native WIN32, so unmanaged) Evidentally you can also create multiple heaps, which I suspect is something more interesting for people writing the actual OS and maybe device drivers than ordinary programmers. I can imagine where from the OS's perspective, each process has its own private heap, but of course the OS has to make all that work.

Yeah apparently graphics people are using those a ton. I had no idea and I’m so pleasantly surprised

I'm using JetBrains Rider

Next video alongside some other rare ones 😀