There is a perfectly good solution for installing services:<blockquote class="tr_bq"> sc create</blockquote> No need to inherit from the install util specific classes in your .net code. The problem with installutil is that it’s not appropriate when automating install with a local service account. You also get a lot of extra code very tied to installutil.

Since I liked the ruby version for parsing phone numbers, I ported it to c#. In order to avoid having to rewrite to much I did the following:<ol> To begin with, the entire project was using ruby name convention. This simplifies things. Whenever there is a missing method where the behavior of the method is not the same as the c# one, I added an extension method. For instance I implemented a variant of gsub. The behavior of this gsub uses $1 for matching groups (since it's more natural to remove a bit of cod[...]

Since I liked the ruby version for parsing phone numbers, I ported it to C#. In order to avoid having to rewrite to much I did the following: To begin with, the entire project was using ruby name convention. This simplifies things. Whenever there is a missing method where the behavior of the method is not the same as the C# one, I added an extension method. For instance I implemented a variant of gsub. The behavior of this gsub uses $1 for matching groups (since it’s more natural to remove a bit of c[...]

I’ve done some small tests while writing the library to handle readonly objects in c#. Turns out that getting the value of a sub expression can be costly (since you have to compile the expression and execute). When just setting one property there can be a performance benefit of using the following syntax:<blockquote class="tr_bq"> new MyClass(1, "2").With(m => m.MyProperty, 3) </blockquote> There might be some way of optimizing the code in order to get better performance for the form:<blockquote class="tr_[...]

I’ve done some small tests while writing the library to handle readonly objects in C#. Turns out that getting the value of a sub expression can be costly (since you have to compile the expression and execute). When just setting one property there can be a performance benefit of using the following syntax: new MyClass(1, “2”).With(m => m.MyProperty, 3) There might be some way of optimizing the code in order to get better performance for the form: new MyClass(1, “2”).With(m => m.MyProperty == 3) [...]