GetNames() returns an IEnumerable. So if you store that result: IEnumerable foo = GetNames(); Then every time you enumerate foo, the GetNames() method is called again (not literally, I can’t find a link that properly explains the details, but see IEnumerable.GetEnumerator()). Resharper sees this, and suggests you to store the result of enumerating GetNames() in … Read more
Just in case none of the above options worked for anyone I fixed my instance of this error by noticing a corrupt entry in my App.Config due to a missing nuget package in the test project.
In Visual Studio 2015 Update3 I have this feature. Just by highlighting properties and then press Ctrl + . and then press Generate Constructor. For example, if you’ve highlighted two properties it will suggest you to create a constructor with two parameters and if you’ve selected three it will suggest one with three parameters and so on. … Read more
The Operating System allows to change the negative sign for numbers. Control panel -> Language and regional settings -> Additional settings -> Negative sign So, current culture could have overridden the negative sign. In this case you need to respect the regional settings, this is the reason of the warning. You can also change the … Read more
Noticable is relative. However: string interpolation is turned into string.Format() at compile-time so they should end up with the same result. There are subtle differences though: as we can tell from this question, string concatenation in the format specifier results in an additional string.Concat() call.
There is (currently) no way to do this out of the box in ReSharper. Fortunately, ReSharper has a very rich extensibility API (albeit poorly documented). I’ve spent a lot of time with Reflector trying to figure things out. We use a similar alignment guideline for class members in a company I work for (to the … Read more
Resharper is primarily concerned with helping you refactor code, and the var keyword generally makes refactoring easier. For example, if the return values of any of those functions ever change to a compatibile type, you don’t have to change any of this code. It’s therefore now a little easier to refactor your tabCaseNotes type, for … Read more
Probably because 397 is a prime of sufficient size to cause the result variable to overflow and mix the bits of the hash somewhat, providing a better distribution of hash codes. There’s nothing particularly special about 397 that distinguishes it from other primes of the same magnitude.
I find that comment very useful as it points out two important things: It makes me ask myself if the method in question should actually be part of the type or not. Since it doesn’t use any instance data, you should at least consider if it could be moved to its own type. Is it … Read more
If you have ReSharper, try emptying the ReSharper cache: In menu, ReSharper > Options > Environment > General > Clear Caches and disabling and re-enabling ReSharper: In menu, Tools > Options > ReSharper > General > Suspend / Restore