Hey Keith, On 4/28/09, Keith <[email protected]> wrote: > Cecil is quite close to the metadata "under the hood." That is, the > way you represent things in Cecil objects is very close to how they're > represented in the physical metadata. This is both good and bad. You > have excellent control over what's in the metadata from "object land," > but you sacrifice many high level niceties.
Well, in that case, I'll happily blame the way custom attributes are encoded, which are tied to a System.Reflection way of describing types. The refactored Cecil will break API compatibility for custom attributes, to better express typed values in custom attributes. > (I hope you don't need a generic type as an attribute parameter. The > Standard is silent on that, far as I can find, and I haven't found an > example to follow.) You just have to use a System.Reflection generic full name. Foo[System.Int32, Version=2.0.0.0, ......], .... -- Jb Evain <[email protected]> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ -- mono-cecil -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
