On 08/13/05 Carlos Alberto Cortez wrote: > > struct version doesn't conform to the mono naming conventions. > > Use a typedef and something like MonoAssemblyVersion. > > This was based on the fact I wanted to keep it -at least initially- as > private. We can rename it the way you want, however.
I just noticed we have already AssemblyVersionSet in domain-internals.h, so please use that. > > Why do you associate assembly bindings to domains? Since they are stored > > in the GAC they seem to be valid for all the domains. > > That's the way they are associated in .Net in both 1.0 and 1.1. In .Net > 2.0 they are domain neutral. So, it's a matter of deciding where we > should put them. >From my limited understanding of it, it makes no sense to have them per-domain, unless there is also a separate mechanims to tell the runtime about policy files that is per-domain. If the files are in the GAC, you end up with the same copy of the policy info in each domain. > > Since this stuff sseems to be used only in one file, there is no point > > in exposing them in the headers. > > I needed it for freeing in mono_domain_unload, but since we are going to This was missing from the patch. Thanks. lupus -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] debian/rules [EMAIL PROTECTED] Monkeys do it better _______________________________________________ Mono-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
