What is the ampersand character at the end of an object type?

See Here - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa664670(v=vs.71).aspx (Have never used though)

The prefix "@" enables the use of keywords as identifiers, which is useful when interfacing with other programming languages. The character @ is not actually part of the identifier, so the identifier might be seen in other languages as a normal identifier, without the prefix. An identifier with an @ prefix is called a verbatim identifier. Use of the @ prefix for identifiers that are not keywords is permitted, but strongly discouraged as a matter of style.

The example:

class @class
{
   public static void @static(bool @bool) {
      if (@bool)
         System.Console.WriteLine("true");
      else
         System.Console.WriteLine("false");
   }   
}
class Class1
{
   static void M() {
      cl\u0061ss.st\u0061tic(true);
   }
}

The comments right before that line of code are telling you exactly what's going on. The & after a type name indicates that it's a reference type, and the @ before a variable name generates a reference to that variable.

(The @ sign can also be used in C# code to escape keywords for use as variable names but that's not what is happening here. pageBounds is not a C# keyword.)

Note that this is not valid C# syntax -- you cannot take a reference to a local variable in C#, although the CLR supports it. (NOTE: As of C# 7.0, this is no longer true; the syntax is described here, but it does not use the & so this decompiled code is still invalid C#).

Creating a reference to a local variable happens implicitly when you use ref and out parameters, for example, but the keywords are used instead of explicitly typing the parameters as reference. (e.g. if you had an out int x, internally that variable is of type Int32&.) The intent of the code, if it were legal C#, would be that pageBounds and local were the same instance with two different names; anything you do to one happens to the other. So, for example, this illegal code:

Rectangle pageBounds;
Rectangle& local = @pageBounds;
local = new Rectangle();

would be the same as this legal code:

Rectangle pageBounds = new Rectangle();

If you tried to compile the code as-decompiled, you would get an error because the compiler treats & as the bitwise and operator, and will complain that you used a type as if it were a variable. But that's ok because you didn't get it from a C# source file. You decompiled an IL method to get it, and there are a lot of things you can do in IL that are illegal in C#. This happens all the time when you decompile code; you see illegal class and method names for example. It just means that the compiler generated IL based on the original code that does not translate directly back into C#, but behaves the way you wanted. The code you are getting back is simply the decompiler's best attempt to produce C# code from the IL it has.

You can see examples of the sort of code that produces these references in the numerous Jetbrains bug reports about them:

• http://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/DOTP-521
• http://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/DOTP-1077
• http://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/DOTP-524