Got a fun article idea for you

[toupswork]

This is something I wanted to try, but I have been so busy.
Given that interfaces have the ability to add a static or instance method with implementation AND given the new extension syntax:

What if:

• You could use an interface, using those, that has no implementing class?
• Then pass an inteface around that is not an actual object instance?

If I get free time to try this out before you can, I will send you an example. Thinking this would be a fun article for you to write

[linkdotnet]

I mean if you use static stuff, then this should be fairly trivial, not? Or maybe I don't get the whole picture :D

[toupswork]

Let me try again.. I think I am basically saying that an interface would have only instance members with implementation. It would need some backing object since you cant pass around null. so you could have a private sealed record Foo:IFoo; that would not implement anything because all implementation is in the interface. The interface would have a static IFoo Create() factory method. Then if you need methods with state, you could use ConditionalWeakTable. This idea came about while thinking about the conditionalweak table experiment along with C# features under consideration that are like traits or interfaces that are implicitly implemented rather than explicitly. Anyway, I don't know. Maybe that's too crazy. Just thinking of random tricks to try.