No, you're right. The types instances allowed in attributes persistence is a quite limited set.
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 4:30 AM, Jordan <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello all, > > I've just had my first look at the new Castle.Transactions code. In > the discussion about read only transactions it was suggested that we > could use the "CustomContext" property to pass in the read only flag. > However, as far as I understand it IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<string, > object>> is not a valid attribute parameter type. > > Or is there some new funky syntax that I'm not aware of? > > cheers, > Jordan. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Castle Project Development List" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en. > > -- Cheers, hammett http://hammett.castleproject.org/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Development List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en.
