Thanks, but what about my first suggestion?

On Dec 6, 2:25 pm, Johannes Rudolph <[email protected]>
wrote:
> May I offer you this nugget:
>
>         class ScopedCecilAssemblyResolver : IDisposable
>         {
>             private DefaultAssemblyResolver _resolver;
>             private StringCollection _referencePaths;
>
>             public ScopedCecilAssemblyResolver( StringCollection
> referencePaths, DefaultAssemblyResolver resolver )
>             {
>                 if ( referencePaths == null )
>                     throw new ArgumentNullException( "referencePaths" );
>                 if ( resolver == null )
>                     throw new ArgumentNullException( "resolver" );
>
>                 _referencePaths = referencePaths;
>                 _resolver = resolver;
>
>                 EnlistDirectoriesInCecilsGlobalResolver();
>             }
>
>             private void EnlistDirectoriesInCecilsGlobalResolver()
>             {
>                 foreach ( string item in _referencePaths )
>                     _resolver.AddSearchDirectory( item );
>             }
>
>             private void RemoveDirectoriesFromCecilsGlobalResolver()
>             {
>                 foreach ( string item in _referencePaths )
>                     _resolver.RemoveSearchDirectory( item );
>             }
>
>             public void Dispose()
>             {
>                 RemoveDirectoriesFromCecilsGlobalResolver();
>             }
>         }
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Timwi <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Currently Mono.Cecil searches for dependencies (during .Resolve()) in
> > the current directory, which is sub-optimal because that directory is
> > usually random and unconnected to the input assembly.
>
> > It would probably be more useful if Mono.Cecil searched in the same
> > directory that the input assembly was in. Do you think this would be
> > doable?
>
> > Of course, it would also be nice to have a way to specify explicit
> > search paths, but that’s just an idea for a new feature :)
>
> > --
> > --
> > mono-cecil
>
>

-- 
--
mono-cecil

Reply via email to