int.Parse("1_000") should work

[ed-graham]

Since C#7, int i = 1_000; is valid syntax; yet int.Parse("1_000"); will still fail. This seems inconsistent.

I know I could do it with NumberFormatInfo.NumberGroupSeparator but that feels relatively painful.

[The-Futurist]

Since C#7, int i = 1_000; is valid syntax; yet int.Parse("1_000"); will still fail. This seems inconsistent.

I know I could do it with NumberFormatInfo.NumberGroupSeparator but that feels relatively painful.

I suspect that is not an error here. That 1_000 is a notation specific to the language, supported and recognized only by the lexer/parser.

It's an interesting point though, perhaps there is some other supported way to do this...

I misinterpreted then, you wrote "should work" as if it wasn't correct, not working, I see what you mean now!

[ed-graham]

Sorry @Korporal , I don't fully understand what you mean when you say it's not an error. I realise this is intended behaviour at present; but I thought this was a forum for suggesting improvements to the language.

[ed-graham]

Ah yes - my title was misleading, I see. I've tried to change it but I think it's now too late!

[HaloFour]

This would be a request for the runtime as it would be an API change.

[En3Tho]

Doesn't valueAsString.Replace("_", "") solve your problem?

[Clockwork-Muse]

Or creating a custom locale with that as a separator.
Or just using their actual local separator? Was there some reason they wanted something unusual?

[ed-graham]

Doesn't valueAsString.Replace("_", "") solve your problem?

Why, yes; yes it does! I was clearly lacking imagination :) I was focusing on the fact that the language didn't support it rather than finding an elegant work-around. This is indeed much neater than a switch statement - thanks!

[ed-graham]

Or creating a custom locale with that as a separator. Or just using their actual local separator? Was there some reason they wanted something unusual?

Yes, I could certainly create a custom locale. I was looking for something a bit quicker and easier; but @En3Tho's answer above will do the trick.

[ed-graham]

Thanks to all who replied. I see now that this is harder than it first appears, and also that there is a simple yet elegant work-around available, so I'll mark this as resolved and forever hold my peace.