Ref parameter: intended behavior or bug?

[Mike Parker]

Regan Heath wrote:

> 
> I think the concept of passing by reference is that when you pass by ref 
> the parameter _is_ the original variable in every possible way.  The 
> compiler might be using a proxy object to implement this, it might not 
> be, IANACW.  As such when you ask for the size of a ref parameter you're 
> asking for the size of the original variable, which in this case is the 
> size of the struct itself.

Yeah, I get it, but it still /feels/ inconsistent to me. If the size of 
a class reference is 4 bytes, then it seems to me that the size of a ref 
parameter should be the same and not the size of the object to which it 
refers. But I suppose we aren't supposed to think of a ref parameter as 
a true reference, but rather as a mutable view of the original data. In 
which case, 'inout' seems more appropriate, in retrospect, than 'ref'.

OK, misconception cleared, situation grokked.