Please do not reply to this email- if you want to comment on the bug, go to the URL shown below and enter your comments there.
Changed by [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bugzilla.ximian.com/show_bug.cgi?id=77399 --- shadow/77399 2006-02-10 08:56:06.000000000 -0500 +++ shadow/77399.tmp.26581 2006-02-10 10:19:40.000000000 -0500 @@ -98,6 +98,28 @@ . ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-02-10 08:56 ------- The testcase I attached compiles and runs on MS.NET, and doesn't throw any exception. + +------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-02-10 10:19 ------- +It does throw an exception if you have a broken Comparer<T>.Default +implementation. Before I fixed it, Comparer<T>.Default returned an +instance of + +---- +class IComparableOfT<T> : Comparer<T> where T : IComparable +{ .... } +---- + +this is wrong because ClassA only implements IComparable<T> and not +IComparable - so the constraint is not met. The bug is that our +runtime doesn't catch this. + +I fixed that to + +---- +class IComparableOfT<T> : Comparer<T> where T : IComparable<T> +{ .... } +---- + _______________________________________________ mono-bugs maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-bugs
