Dave Curylo wrote > As for the expected InvalidOperationException, I think this is one area > that the mono maintainers seem to take liberty to deviate from MS .NET > behavior. I've logged a few bugs like this in the past where mono does not > throw an exception but MS does and they refuse to fix these because it is > likely to break people's working code. IMHO it would be better to have > compatibility as I think most people expect this when coming from the > Windows world. I think most .NET developers that start using mono > probably > have experience working in Windows and would the same exceptions raised on > either platform...devs want to be able to take their code to any OS, > including Windows.
Hi Dave, I am sorry to differ from your reasoning and thanks for logging this as a bug for me. Are you suggesting that System.Xml.Serialization.XmlSerializer in Mono can serialize read only property with a non-public setter? I guess, it is most unfortunate that ECMA does not prescribe the behaviour of System.Xml.Serialization.XmlSerializer. So what is Mono's position on treatment of class with non-public setter and can you point me to the definition/specification? If departure like this is prevalent (indeed I have long MS .Net background) and is up to mono developer's wishes then may I respectfully suggest to mono project to change its claim on their project web page http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page from the current one which states that: "Cross platform, open source .Net development framework" Since cross platform is an important issue to me, perhaps Mono is not the right tools. MarL -- View this message in context: http://mono.1490590.n4.nabble.com/XML-Serialization-difference-between-WinCLR-and-Mono-runtime-tp4659562p4659772.html Sent from the Mono - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Mono-list maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
