https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661987
https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661987#c3 --- Comment #3 from David Curylo <[email protected]> 2011-02-16 23:14:36 UTC --- I don't agree. Both runtimes should offer the same behavior. The problem with it being limited one one framework and not limited on the other is that this creates an incompatibility. If a developer builds and develops their code under Mono, and then deploys to .NET, their code will fail when deployed on a different, pseudo-compatible framework. In that case, the only way to be sure code will work on either framework would be to build on .NET and test for compatibility with Mono. Also, there is no reason to believe that a future version of the DLR will offer a DynamicObject that supports serialization, but if it ever did, that would be the time to enable similar behavior on Mono. Picking and choosing when which functionality to implement based on design opinions rather than compatibility defeats the purpose of Mono as a "cross platform implementation of .NET." (In reply to comment #2) > I think this is more .net limitation than feature. We are not doing anything > wrong here just allow more sensible behaviour than .net 4. I know it can break > serialization when doing mono -> .net. > > Our code is solely based on DLR which should be inline with .net. I think > there > is quite high possibility that the missing Serializable will be fixed in the > next .net version. -- 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
