Stefan Holdermans wrote: > JF> I would argue that the behavior described by the original > JF> poster is in fact a bug. The spec says (part. I 8.5.3.1 > JF> Visibility Of Type): "The visibility of a type definer is the > JF> same as that for the type from which it was generated." (as I > JF> understand it, an array type is a "type > JF> definer") > > Mmm ... What version of the CLI standard are you referring > to? The above phrase soes show up in neither the docs that shipped > with v1.1 of the .NET Framework nor the final draft of October 2002 [1].
Ugh. You are right. I was looking at the version that shipped with the VS 2005 Community Technology Preview March 2004. Sorry about that. It's interesting that, while the spec changed, the CTP code is still broken (at least in the March 2004 version). > I'd guess the v1.1 bits are not to be expected to adhere to version > of the specs that are newer to the former. Technically no, but I definitely consider it a bug in the original spec. > I'd expect newer versions of the specs to eloborate on the > issue, since, in the presence of generics, type definers are no > longer limited to being constructed from a small set of type > constructors (array, vector, managed pointer, unmanaged pointer), > but can be generated by user-defined constructors as well. You might be right that generics triggered them to think about the issue more, but, like I said, I consider it a bug in the original spec as well. Regards, Jeroen =================================== This list is hosted by DevelopMentorŪ http://www.develop.com Some .NET courses you may be interested in: NEW! Guerrilla ASP.NET, 17 May 2004, in Los Angeles http://www.develop.com/courses/gaspdotnetls View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com
