-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Added condition of empty for concurrent dictionary #44581
Conversation
Tagging subscribers to this area: @eiriktsarpalis, @jeffhandley Issue meta data
|
...ries/System.Collections.Concurrent/src/System/Collections/Concurrent/ConcurrentDictionary.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks.
...ries/System.Collections.Concurrent/src/System/Collections/Concurrent/ConcurrentDictionary.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
@stephentoub Thank you for helping. Really appreciated. BTW, I like the dotnet runtime talk at dotnetConf2020 of yours and jkotas. 👍👍 |
Collection is already empty why to initialize it again with new emtpy tables.
Addressed PR feedback.
Comment corrected. Co-authored-by: Stephen Toub <stoub@microsoft.com>
18b9747
to
4839621
Compare
Hi @stephentoub any problem with PR? I checked its been merged to master! But you open it again? Any problem? Please let me know if anything needed from my side! 😇 |
No problem. We've been having some infrastructure issues, and I closed/opened the PR to try to trigger CI to run. |
Ohh OK. OK. @stephentoub no worries! |
If the collection is already empty why to initialize it again with new empty tables.