Example (note the case):
string s = \"Hello world!\";
String s = \"Hello world!\";
What are
@JaredPar (a developer on the C# compiler and prolific SO user!) wrote a great blog post on this issue. I think it is worth sharing here. It is a nice perspective on our subject.
string
vs.String
is not a style debate[...]
The keyword
string
has concrete meaning in C#. It is the typeSystem.String
which exists in the core runtime assembly. The runtime intrinsictly understands this type and provides the capabilities developers expect for strings in .NET. Its presence is so critical to C# that if that type doesn’t exist the compiler will exit before attempting to even parse a line of code. Hencestring
has a precise, unambiguous meaning in C# code.The identifier
String
though has no concrete meaning in C#. It is an identifier that goes through all the name lookup rules asWidget
,Student
, etc … It could bind to string or it could bind to a type in another assembly entirely whose purposes may be entirely different thanstring
. Worse it could be defined in a way such that code likeString s = "hello"
; continued to compile.class TricksterString { void Example() { String s = "Hello World"; // Okay but probably not what you expect. } } class String { public static implicit operator String(string s) => null; }
The actual meaning of
String
will always depend on name resolution. That means it depends on all the source files in the project and all the types defined in all the referenced assemblies. In short it requires quite a bit of context to know what it means.True that in the vast majority of cases
String
andstring
will bind to the same type. But usingString
still means developers are leaving their program up to interpretation in places where there is only one correct answer. WhenString
does bind to the wrong type it can leave developers debugging for hours, filing bugs on the compiler team and generally wasting time that could’ve been saved by usingstring
.Another way to visualize the difference is with this sample:
string s1 = 42; // Errors 100% of the time String s2 = 42; // Might error, might not, depends on the code
Many will argue that while this is information technically accurate using
String
is still fine because it’s exceedingly rare that a code base would define a type of this name. Or that whenString
is defined it’s a sign of a bad code base.[...]
You’ll see that
String
is defined for a number of completely valid purposes: reflection helpers, serialization libraries, lexers, protocols, etc … For any of these librariesString
vs.string
has real consequences depending on where the code is used.So remember when you see the
String
vs.string
debate this is about semantics, not style. Choosing string gives crisp meaning to your code base. ChoosingString
isn’t wrong but it’s leaving the door open for surprises in the future.
Note: I copy/pasted most of the blog post for archive reason. I ignore some parts, so I recommend to skip and to read the blog post if you can.