Also, your patch has been applied, so you can do an update now.
On 2/27/07, Rupert Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Not yet, but I'm just about to test it ;-) On 2/27/07, Tomas Restrepo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Rupert, > > > Tomas, when I built this using the build-dotnet11 script it complained > > (with an error not just a warning), that exposing an unsigned byte in > > a public API would make the library non-CLS compliant. So I commented > > out the Get/SetSByte method declarations in IHeaders for the moment. > > Do you think that we should be trying to keep CLS compliance? > > That's a good question. I think it's important, but we don't necessarily > need to force it. We should be able to explicitly mark any problem members > with a [CLSCompliant(false)] attribute so they don't cause trouble. I'll see > about it and update the patch accordingly (and probably run it through FxCop > and see what comes up). > > That should still allow a language only supporting CLSCompliance to access > any CLSCompliant members in the interface and ignore the rest. > > Have you found anything else in the patch that needs addressing? > > Tomas Restrepo > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.winterdom.com/weblog/ > > > > >
