https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=632611
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=632611#c10 --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Pryor <[email protected]> 2010-08-20 16:34:04 UTC --- I'm saying that //activity/@android:name is the name of a Java class that Android should load, create, and dispatch invocation to. If this Java type doesn't exist, Bad Things Happen. ;-) Monodroid is responsible for generating this type during the build process. Now, the managed type name and the Java type names don't need to be identical, and in fact, almost never will; monodroid camelCases the namespace name, so the managed type Mono.Samples.HelloActivity has a Java proxy type of mono.samples.HelloActivity (note the case changes). All that's required is that the //activity/@android:name value in AndroidManifest.xml exist as a loadable Java type name. Consequently, if we had a pressing use case to allow people to choose the Java name, monodroid could use [Name] instead, or we could use the already widely used [Register] attribute (though [Register] uses JNI names, not java names, but we could do the necessary munging if deemed necessary). The question is, IS there such a pressing need to allow controlling the type names that monodroid generates? I can't think of one. -- 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
