AceHack: For the current split there are no perf gains or changes to the way assemblies are loaded. However, this split sets us up to improve this in the future (for example, you could imagine that we could replace the under pinnings of Reflection with something like CCI).
|Tech Off||Member Variable Prefixes - what do you use?||26||Jun 13, 2006 at 8:41 AM|
|Tech Off||FxCop advise vs Release Mode Optimisations||5||Apr 11, 2006 at 10:53 PM|
Jedrek: While the Portable Library encourages binary compatibility because it makes deployment and testing easier, nothing stops you from shipping a portable library in source form like existing open source libraries. All we're about, is making it easier for the developer to target a given set of APIs that are known to run on their targeted platforms (if other/newer platforms happen to support those APIs, even better).
CKurt: Currently the compiler warnings you'd like are errors around missing members & types. :)Thanks for the great suggestion though, I'll take it back to the team.
petr: Thanks for watching. Sounds like you've had a bit of experience around this sort of thing in the past. Download the bits and tell what you think.
compupc1: There are no current plans to support .NET Compact Framework with the Portable Library.
felix9: My team doesn't actually work on the XAML technologies, I'd recommend asking your question around XAML compatibility over on the Metro apps forums over at: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-us/category/windowsapps.
Shaggygi: Plans with Mono changed a little when Novell was acquired earlier this year. We're still talking around this, however, I don't know of any firm dates around when this would be fully supported.
compupc1: I'd love to get in contact with you to talk about your scenarios - give me a shout, david DOT kean AT microsoft dot com.