[Mono-dev] System.dll few patches for review
sebastien.pouliot at gmail.com
Thu Oct 5 07:30:22 EDT 2006
Thanks for spotting/fixing this!
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 00:19 -0700, Andrew Skiba wrote:
> Hello Sebastien.
> I ran mono-api-check on both 1.1 and 2.0 profile, and it did not see any
> difference after I removed IEnumerable. So I will commit this patch and
> check class statuses of 1.1 and 2.0 in a few days.
> > > > > * X509CertificateCollection.patch - remove unnecessary overload
> > > >
> > > > If this doesn't cause any error with the class library
> > status pages
> > > > then remove (don't comment) it. The comment itself can be
> > put in the
> > > > ChangeLog.
> > >
> > > According to MSDN X509CertificateCollection does not implement
> > > IEnumerable privately.
> > You're right. Anyway CollectionBase already implements
> > IEnumerable. Not sure why it was put there (it's been there
> > since the first commit in 2002).
> > > Actually, that means that the patch should look like in the new
> > > attachment.
> > >
> > > What do you mean by class library status pages?
> > The "old corcompare" which is available online from
> > http://www.mono-project.com/Class_Status
> > You should check both 1.x and 2.0 profiles.
> > > I could run make
> > > run-test after this patch applied, and it gave same number
> > of errors
> > > before and after the patch. Is that enough?
> > No. It will spot functionality regressions but it won't spot
> > errors in API definitions. I don't see how/why this could
> > break but it's safer to always check the pages after an API
> > change (either manually on your own computer or on the public
> > pages a while after the check-in).
> > --
> > Sebastien Pouliot <sebastien at ximian.com>
> > Blog: http://pages.infinit.net/ctech/
More information about the Mono-devel-list