Hey JB, In the above case its not reconstructing the type,right.In dynamic injection of code ,whatever needs to be inferred , is from the Operand .If the underlying Element-type of Operand ( Array type) referred is same as the type imported,the simplest was to change the element type of the operand .
So I felt leaving the class as is would have done no harm anyways. csk On Jun 17, 1:25 pm, Jb Evain <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 9:14 AM, srcKode <[email protected]> wrote: > > Now when I try to migrate the code to 0.9.5 I don't see the same > > option.Was there a reason to change it the way it is now? > > So it took that much just to say that in 0.9 there's no setter for > TypeSpecification.ElementType. This has been removed because if you > need to do that, it's better to express the reconstruction of the > type. > > Jb -- -- mono-cecil
