<div>
&gt; ince value is of type object, not of type object [], is this still correct (standard)?<br />
<br />
yes, it is a param array, meaning you can use as many objects as you want, one or more.
</div>


<div>
&gt; but I need to know whether this is standard. <br />
<br />
it is standard when you hit upon a method that has its signature like the one above. You can also use that signature for your own methods. <br />
<br />
I'm personally not a fan of using param arrays, I think it is better to use a List of some sort, and &quot;standard&quot; is a bit in the eye of the beholder, but the language allows it and it certainly appears in a lot of places in the dotnet libraries.
</div>


<div>
So are you saying that it is standard because the signature is &quot;params object [] values&quot;? As opposed to say &quot;object [] values&quot;?
</div>


<div>
Thanks, that was exactly what I needed!
</div>


<div>
Note the not-so-subtle differences:<br />
<br />

<ol type="1">
<li>Situation without &quot;params&quot;. Now, as a caller, you have to define an array of type object[] and pass that on. The method will then get that array by reference.</li>
<li>Situation with &quot;params&quot;. Now, as a caller, you have to put every element of the array hard coded comma separated in the calling of the method (like you did). <br />
</li>
</ol>
Why would you want to have these two types of parameter declaration? I believe it is in semantics. But others would say it is all just syntactic sugar. The thing is, it depends a bit on what you are after and what you want to communicate to the caller.<br />

</div>


<div>
&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Thanks, that was exactly what I needed!<br />
<br />
ah, great! I wasn't finished yet, as you can see ;) But thanks for the points!<br />

</div>


<div>
<div class="content wysiwyg-content">
Ok, this is probably an easy question, but here goes. &nbsp;When you add to the DataRowCollection of a DataTable, it says that there are two overloads:<br />
1) DataRowCollection.Add(para<wbr />ms object [] values) <br />
2) DataRowCollection.Add(Data<wbr />Row row)<br />
<br />
So my question is this, if I've declared the DataTable to be a table consisting of a single row, say &quot;ID&quot;, then can I add the single value as just &nbsp;DataRowCollection.Add(valu<wbr />e), assuming that value is of type object? Since value is of type object, not of type object [], is this still correct (standard)? I have written a program that demonstrates that this works, but I need to know whether this is standard. &nbsp;So, I'll award points to the first person to explain how this behavior is/is not standard (this would include references to the standard or other credible sources).<br />
<br />
Thanks! 
</div>
</div>


Ok, this is probably an easy question, but here goes.  When you add to the DataRowCollection of a DataTable, it says that there are two overloads:
1) DataRowCollection.Add(params object [] values) 
2) DataRowCollection.Add(DataRow row)

So my question is this, if I've declared the DataTable to be a table consisting of a single row, say "ID", then can I add the single value as just  DataRowCollection.Add(value), assuming that value is of type object? Since value is of type object, not of type object [], is this still correct (standard)? I have written a program that demonstrates that this works, but I need to know whether this is standard.  So, I'll award points to the first person to explain how this behavior is/is not standard (this would include references to the standard or other credible sources).

Thanks! 

Can I add an object directly to a Data Row?

C# is an object-oriented programming language created in conjunction with Microsoft’s .NET framework. Compilation is usually done into the Microsoft Intermediate Language (MSIL), which is then JIT-compiled to native code (and cached) during execution in the Common Language Runtime (CLR).