Proposal: Properties should not be of type Task or Task<T> about asyncusageanalyzers

[ChrSteinert]

While this is old, is it still up for debate?

[sharwell]

@ChrSteinert Sure, feedback is always welcome. 😄

[ChrSteinert]

Ok, so here I go 😉

Having a Task as the type of a property must not always be a "bad" thing. I remember some custom task runner I once wrote (with retry policies and stuff). At least the internal bits had Tasks as fields and properties. This scenario seems small, so I'd rather vote for a warning. Also, even in this scenario, having a property, which, by the semantics of a property, is supposed to be publicly exposed, with type task seems worth a warning for above mentioned reasons. So pleas, let's make it a thing ;)