ROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 4:16 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
--- Serge Lidin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Clearly, this deficiency needs fixing. And I extend our profound
> thanks to Brent, The Intrepid Vigilan
--- Serge Lidin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Clearly, this deficiency needs fixing. And I extend our profound thanks to Brent,
>The Intrepid
> Vigilante of Partition II and Surrounding Territories!
Indeed, perhaps time for a separate partition II mailing list... ;->
Your discussions make me real
Original Message-
From: Serge Lidin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 3:49 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
This is a deficiency in the current version of the Loader -- explicit
overrides (through MethodImpls) cannot be chain
eds fixing. And I extend our profound thanks to Brent, The
Intrepid Vigilante of Partition II and Surrounding Territories!
--Serge
-Original Message-
From: Brent E. Rector [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2002 2:25 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [DOTNET] Partition I
I cannot figure out how to use MethodImpl's to override a virtual method
when I have multiple levels of inheritance using MethodImpl's. Let's
start with a simple C# example:
internal class Base {
public override string ToString () { return "Base"; }
}
internal class Derived : Base {
pu
;Inner" in "Middle" in "Outer".
I don't seem to need the ExportedType definitions for nested types. What
am I not understanding?
...
-Original Message-
From: Serge Lidin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 8:46 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj
2002 8:52 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II metadata spec question
I would, of course, fix up the PROPERTYMAP table appropriately...
-- Brent Rector, .NET Wise Owl
Demeanor for .NET - an obfuscation utility
http://www.wiseowl.com/Products/Products.aspx
-Original Me
]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II metadata spec question
Thanks again.
One somewhat related question. In an uncompressed metadata stream (#-),
are *PTR tables always required or only required when remapping is
needed? For example, in an uncompressed metadata stream if I sort the
PROPERTY table
?
-- Brent Rector, .NET Wise Owl
Demeanor for .NET - an obfuscation utility
http://www.wiseowl.com/Products/Products.aspx
-Original Message-
From: Serge Lidin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 8:34 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II metadata spec
ls of enclosing types
if you want to expose a nested type.
Thanks,
Serge
-Original Message-
From: Brent E. Rector [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 11:38 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [DOTNET] Partition II metadata spec question
Re: the InterfaceImpl table.
I
ement that the InterfaceImpl records
pertaining to the same class be contiguous.
Thanks,
Serge
-Original Message-
From: Brent E. Rector [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2002 11:38 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [DOTNET] Partition II metadata spec question
Re
Re: the InterfaceImpl table.
In the metadata, the interfaces implemented by a type consume a
contiguous range in the InterfaceImpl table. That is, it's possible to
specify the interfaces implemented by a type using a tuple consisting of
the indices of first and last entries for the type in the In
I suppose I should add that I understand that the ExportedType
declarations for the nested types are used by the compiler when
determining if a reference should be able to bind to the types.
A better way to phrase my question is: Can there can be a
cross-assembly/module direct reference (i.e. Nam
Given the following class declarations in the non-prime module of a
multi-module assembly:
public class Outer {
public class Middle {
public class Inner {
}
}
}
Given the following reference in an assembly that references the
multi-module assembly containing the above declaration:
c
Original Message-
From: Sumanth Rao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 6:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
Syncfusion's Obfuscator already features packaged obfuscation. They
allow you to treat a bunch of assemblies a
Syncfusion's Obfuscator already features packaged obfuscation. They allow you to treat
a bunch of assemblies as one unit and treat that unit as one for obfuscation. If your
purpose is obfuscation of some critical piece of code, then I would recommend that you
take a look at them before attempti
them appropriately.
-- Brent Rector, .NET Wise Owl
Demeanor for .NET - an obfuscation utility
http://www.wiseowl.com/Products/Products.aspx
-Original Message-
From: Serge Lidin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 2:53 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partiti
]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
One last question (for the day ), am I correct in understanding that
if I have a TYPEREF resolution scope of anything except 0 or 1, the
decoded token will correctly reference the appropriate type? That is,
there's no heuristic lik
IL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
One last question (for the day ), am I correct in understanding that
if I have a TYPEREF resolution scope of anything except 0 or 1, the
decoded token will correctly reference the appropriate type? That is,
there's no heuristic
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
Resolution scope of a nested TypeRef is another TypeRef (encloser). If a
TypeRef has scope 0 (type defined somewhere in this assembly), 1 (in
this module), ModuleRef (in another module of this assembly) or
AssemblyRef (
, 2002 1:38 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
Resolution scope of a nested TypeRef is another TypeRef (encloser). If a
TypeRef has scope 0 (type defined somewhere in this assembly), 1 (in
this module), ModuleRef (in another module of this assembly) or
Demeanor for .NET - an obfuscation utility
http://www.wiseowl.com/Products/Products.aspx
-Original Message-
From: Serge Lidin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 1:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
In this case,
NET - an obfuscation utility
http://www.wiseowl.com/Products/Products.aspx
-Original Message-
From: Serge Lidin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 9:00 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
Brent,
I suspect you are correc
type.
Thanks,
Serge
-Original Message-
From: Brent E. Rector [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 1:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
Oh another question in this nebulous area...
Let's assume I do run into
Brent Rector, .NET Wise Owl
Demeanor for .NET - an obfuscation utility
http://www.wiseowl.com/Products/Products.aspx
-Original Message-
From: Serge Lidin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 9:00 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata
n utility
http://www.wiseowl.com/Products/Products.aspx
-Original Message-
From: Serge Lidin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 9:00 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
Brent,
I suspect you are correct: strictly speaking, r
ROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
> This isn't legal according to the Partition II Metadata spec and
> according to Serge's most excellent book on IL. The problem isn't that
> it is static member o
iday, April 12, 2002 8:13 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
This isn't legal according to the Partition II Metadata spec and
according to Serge's most excellent book on IL. The problem isn't that
it is static member of the type. That
ntor
(http://www.develop.com)
http://www.javageeks.com/tneward
http://www.clrgeeks.com/tneward
- Original Message -
From: "Brent E. Rector" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 7:33 PM
Subject: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
&g
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 7:33 PM
Subject: [DOTNET] Partition II Metadata Spec question
> Using VS.NET, I created a MFC Application project. The *only* change I
> made was to switch on the /CLR command line option (which then for
Using VS.NET, I created a MFC Application project. The *only* change I
made was to switch on the /CLR command line option (which then forces
you to turn a few others off). This produces a single module .EXE
managed assembly containing with managed code and unmanaged data.
PEVerify /MD states that
31 matches
Mail list logo
