>> That's something that is working, not well for some corner cases, but sufficiently enough for most cases. >>
Can you tell an example of a case that fails. I want to reproduce it and if possible fix it - if indeed its fixable. On Aug 9, 4:47 pm, Jorge Freitas Branco <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok, everything seems to be fine now with the lines! Thanks again! > > On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 12:29 PM, Jorge Freitas Branco < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > I'll do that. Attributes now seem to be working. Thanks! > > > On Sun, Aug 9, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Jb Evain <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On 8/9/09, Jorge Freitas Branco <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Also, what is the expected behaviour of the SaveAssembly() method if we > >> > don't actually change anything after loading the assembly? I've checked > >> the > >> > checksums of my .exe, both after and before calling SaveAssembly() > >> without > >> > having actually changed a thing and they're different. Is this > >> expectable? > >> > It seems to be messing up with Visual Studio IDE Debugger, as it points > >> out > >> > the wrong exception lines, etc. Maybe I am missnig something? Like in > >> this > >> > attributes thing? > > >> Yes it is expected. Cecil has no way to know if you actually modified > >> the assembly or not, so it will serialize it again. With possible > >> changes. > > >> You can ask Cecil to read/write the debug symbols so the debugger > >> doesn't get confused. Search the group, it's been covered multiple > >> times. > > >> -- > >> Jb Evain <[email protected]> > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ -- mono-cecil -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
