You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
A bit more detail on that (or better, why) methods that implement interface methods have to be public even with the interface method is, say, internal. #44194
Is it really the case that when an interface method is, say, marked internal, an implementation for that method must be public? This seems a bit startling and worth a bit more explanation - what if the reason the method is internal in the interface is that one of its argument types is internal? Then I actually can't implement it using a normal class method - it's required to be public by this rule but it can't be public because one of its argument types isn't public.
A bit more detail on that (or better, why) methods that implement interface methods have to be public even with the interface method is, say, internal. · Issue #44194 · dotnet/docs
Activity
BillWagner commentedon Jan 9, 2025
Hi @VesperGarment
Yes, it's true that a method that implicitly implements an interface method must be public. Sharplab
The way around this is to use explicit interface implementation: Sharplab
We should include this information in the article.