On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:06 AM Volkan Yazıcı <volkan.yaz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The reason I wanted to go with a simple `String type` field is to keep
> the impact surface and backward compatibility issues at the bay.
>
> I am in favor of `KeyValuePair<V>` -- `KeyValuePair<K,V>` feels like
> an engineering overkill for our usages. That said, this translates to
> 368 occurrences of `KeyValuePair` in the code that needs to be
> adjusted. Do we really want to go in that direction?
Would it work, to introduce a new GenericKeyValuePair<V>, and change
KeyValuePair to extend GenericKeyValuePair<String>?
Jochen
--
Look, that's why there's rules, understand? So that you think before
you break 'em.
-- (Terry Pratchett, Thief of Time)
