Docs: Can you rewrite the article?

Created on 1 Mar 2019  ·  5Comments  ·  Source: dotnet/docs

@x13xxxswatxxx commented on Fri Mar 01 2019

For me personally, the article seemed complicated.
5 times (2 days), already tried to start over and just got more confused.
The beginning is more or less clear, but then comes the use of event, EventHandler <class>, creating classes for it, using lambda expressions for add, remove, as if we work with them every day.
why internal to create an extension?
It is not clear which class to insert search into.
where did lister come from and how to apply at all.

Лично для меня, статья показалась сложной.
5 раз (2-х дней), уже пробовал начинать сначала и только больше запутался.
Начало более менее понятно, но далее идёт применение event, EventHandler<class>, создание классов под него, применение лямбда выражений для add, remove, как будто мы работаем с ними каждый день.
зачем internal, чтобы создать расширение?
Непонятно в какой класс нужно вставлять search.
откуда взяли lister и как вообще применить.


Сведения о документе

Не вносите правки в этот раздел. Это необходимо для связывания страницы сайта docs.microsoft.com с вопросом на GitHub.

Area - C# Guide Technology - C# Fundamentals P2 Pri2 doc-bug dotnet-csharprod

All 5 comments

Hi team,
I'm moving this here since the user's comment is about the original documentation
best

Same, I wish this was clearer. I think too many assumptions are made by the writer about prior reader knowledge. Although, I've been reading through the C# concepts docs in order, it would still help a lot if individual bits of code here could be defined a bit better. Assume we are idiots please

I've made a new issue as well. This article does not follow the event conventions in .net (links below). The delegate name is very misleading and events are invoked directly instead of used an "OnFileFound" method for derived classes.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/events/
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/design-guidelines/event

I agree with the other comments and the example isn't even correct as stated by robloo. Almost better to just remove it in the short-term.

This article is simply terrible. Came here to refresh my knowledge of recommended patters in .NET patterns and realized the previous MSDN article about this was way, way more clear and correct.

Was this page helpful?
0 / 5 - 0 ratings

Related issues

sime3000 picture sime3000  ·  3Comments

gmatv picture gmatv  ·  3Comments

stanuku picture stanuku  ·  3Comments

Eilon picture Eilon  ·  3Comments

ike86 picture ike86  ·  3Comments