[Mono-dev] Arguing for reconsideration of WONTFIX status of 425512
erratic at devel.ws
Thu Feb 12 09:00:31 EST 2009
All I'm saying is, if "hacky" stuff does not satisfy the business need then
it's a useless effort. We (well not me I'm not writing for mono yet) have to
consider who's ultimately going to be using it and what their needs are.
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 5:56 AM, Stifu <stifu at free.fr> wrote:
> Your opinion makes sense, but then, why bother with Windows.Forms (or other
> things like pseudo-Windows registry support), for example? The Mono team
> seems a bit torn between adding "hacky" stuff for the sake of compatibility
> (note: I'm not bashing, I rely on the Windows.Forms support of Mono
> and not trying to match .NET when easily possible (like this post from
> yesterday shows: http://www.go-mono.com/forums/).
> Jérémie LAVAL wrote:
> > However, I think Mono isn't meant to be a *reimplementation* of .NET,
> > it's
> > an implementation of the *specifications* defined at ECMA/ISO.
> > Now, if developers are using implementation specific details they are
> > shooting themselves in the foot and should go fix their mess themselves,
> > not
> > blame Mono for it.
> > Again, just my humble opinion.
> > --
> > Jérémie Laval
> > jeremie.laval at gmail.com
> > http://garuma.wordpress.com
> View this message in context:
> Sent from the Mono - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mono-devel-list