Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Implicit type conversion, also known as coercion or type juggling, is an automatic type conversion by the compiler. Some programming languages allow compilers to provide coercion; others require it. In a mixed-type expression, data of one or more subtypes can be converted to a supertype as needed at runtime so that the program will run correctly.
Boxing in C# is implicit. Unboxing is the operation of converting a value of a reference type (previously boxed) into a value of a value type. [15] Unboxing in C# requires an explicit type cast. Example:
There are many examples of languages that allow implicit type conversions, but in a type-safe manner. For example, both C++ and C# allow programs to define operators to convert a value from one type to another with well-defined semantics. When a C++ compiler encounters such a conversion, it treats the operation just like a function call.
Any user-defined conversion must be explicitly marked as explicit or implicit, unlike C++ copy constructors and conversion operators, which are both implicit by default. C# has explicit support for covariance and contravariance in generic types, [16]: 144 [20]: 23 unlike C++ which has some degree of support for contravariance simply through the ...
Autoboxing is the term for getting a reference type out of a value type just through type conversion (either implicit or explicit). The compiler automatically supplies the extra source code that creates the object. For example, in versions of Java prior to J2SE 5.0, the following code did not compile:
C# allows library-defined types to be integrated with existing types and operators by using custom implicit/explicit conversions and operator overloading. See example in section Integration of library-defined types
The process of verifying and enforcing the constraints of types—type checking—may occur at compile time (a static check) or at run-time (a dynamic check). If a language specification requires its typing rules strongly, more or less allowing only those automatic type conversions that do not lose information, one can refer to the process as strongly typed; if not, as weakly typed.
Visual Basic: strong implicit with optional explicit typing nominal static Visual Basic (.NET) weak [TS 4] explicit static Visual Prolog: strong partially implicit nominal static Wolfram Language: strong dynamic Windows PowerShell: strong implicit dynamic XL: strong nominal static Xojo: strong explicit nominal static XPath/XQuery: strong ...