> class Base<T> {
> public virtual void M(List<T> p) {}
> }
> class Derived<T,S> : Base<S[]> {
> public override void M(List<S[]> p) {}
> }
>
> If you compare the signatures of the two method definitions, they won't
> match.
> You would have to construct the instantiated method "Base<S[]>.M"
> (perform type substitution in all method parameters) in order to get the
> same method signature.
I wonder if the linker code linked above
("https://github.com/mono/mono/blob/master/mcs/tools/linker/Mono.Linker.Steps/TypeMapStep.cs";)
handles this scenario correctly - can't really dig into it right now,
but at first glance, it doesn't seem to. Actually, it apparently
simply calls Resolve on the base type, without special handling of
GenericInstanceTypes.
I guess if someone has already implemented a complete overridden
method/interface implementation matcher that exactly matches the CLI
specs, that would definitely make a nice Rock.
You're right, though: to use a signature string for base method
matching, you'd need to construct a type Base<S[]> whose members have
substituted types and call the base signature strings for those. Which
is what Reflection gives you when you call Type.BaseType in such a
scenario, by the way; so one could argue that it would be nice if
Cecil could do this automatically, too. It doesn't really match
Cecil's "we just represent the metadata" philosophy, though.
Fabian
--
--
mono-cecil
