Hello,
First, thank you for maintaining this great project.
I'm looking ahead at the upcoming release of Entity Framework 10 and see that it is expected to introduce its own native LeftJoin method (dotnet/runtime#110292).
This raises a potential issue for this library: a possible method name collision and ambiguity for users who are using both this library and EF 10. When a developer types .LeftJoin(), it might be unclear which method (the library's or EF's) will be resolved, leading to confusion or compilation errors.
I imagine this potential overlap may already be on your radar, but I was curious to hear if you have any preliminary thoughts on ensuring smooth compatibility when EF 10 is released?
As just one possible idea, the MoreLINQ team adopted a solution for a similar issue by encouraging users to leverage the C# 6 using static feature (morelinq/MoreLINQ#351 (comment)). This allows users to explicitly import the library's methods to avoid ambiguity, all without requiring a breaking change in your method naming.
Thanks again for your work!
Hello,
First, thank you for maintaining this great project.
I'm looking ahead at the upcoming release of Entity Framework 10 and see that it is expected to introduce its own native
LeftJoinmethod (dotnet/runtime#110292).This raises a potential issue for this library: a possible method name collision and ambiguity for users who are using both this library and EF 10. When a developer types
.LeftJoin(), it might be unclear which method (the library's or EF's) will be resolved, leading to confusion or compilation errors.I imagine this potential overlap may already be on your radar, but I was curious to hear if you have any preliminary thoughts on ensuring smooth compatibility when EF 10 is released?
As just one possible idea, the MoreLINQ team adopted a solution for a similar issue by encouraging users to leverage the C# 6
using staticfeature (morelinq/MoreLINQ#351 (comment)). This allows users to explicitly import the library's methods to avoid ambiguity, all without requiring a breaking change in your method naming.Thanks again for your work!