https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=393900
User [EMAIL PROTECTED] added comment https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=393900#c1 Rolf Bjarne Kvinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Priority|P5 - None |P4 - Low --- Comment #1 from Rolf Bjarne Kvinge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-05-23 04:29:13 MST --- The "Option Strict Off will probably fail" warning is really because the compiler hasn't been tested a lot with it, so in this case the warning would have helped, so I'll add it later on for the default case too. There's no difference in the generated code with Option Strict Off, the only difference is if you get errors or not for some constructs. This also means that unless you're using features which are only allowed with Option Strict Off, the warning is completely useless, given that you won't hit any Option Strict Off-specific codepaths, so making the default value different from MS will only create confusion or complicate matters for no real benefit, given that if the code is compilable with Option Strict On, there's no difference, and if not, you'll just waste the users time making him figure out whats wrong and adding -optionstrict- to the command line. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. _______________________________________________ mono-bugs maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-bugs
