[Mono-dev] Heads up: Elimination of the 2.0 and 4.0 profiles
jodom at escambia.k12.fl.us
Wed Oct 22 20:59:26 UTC 2014
I can see another advantage in that the large increment would be an easy way to remember where the 2.x and 4.0 compatibility break is for writing applications that need to target the widest set of backwards-compatible platforms.
Of course, there is the question of whether the other features in the pipeline justify the 4.0 moniker in a positive fashion ...
>>> Martin Thwaites <monoforum at my2cents.co.uk> 10/22/14 3:21 PM >>>
Would you be looking at calling this Mono 4.0? Not that it makes any
difference really, it just seems there's been a lot of improvements in
recently, and an announcement of a new version me give some renewed
On 22 October 2014 21:10, Miguel de Icaza <miguel at xamarin.com> wrote:
> Hey Alex,
> It is very repetitive work, so what I wanted to do was to write a perl
> script to remove the *obvious* ifdefs. The tool would remove only those
> that match the following criteria (more or less):
> - Remove toplevel #if NET_2_0 with the final #endif
> - Only remove those that contain those preprocessor directives
> And then have a human do the more fine-tuned approach. There are a
> couple more defines that I remember could be automated, but I would love to
> have this in the form of a script.
> I am afraid of applying a patch like that blindly, because there are no
> exact guarantees of what happened without reviewing the whole file. So a
> script with the invariants would take a lot of my nervousness out.
> Also, when I did it once, I had a setup where I rebuilt the assemblies and
> compared the output. This would ensure that removal of ifdefs did not
> change the resulting binaries.
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 4:04 PM, akoeplinger <alex.koeplinger at outlook.com>
>> Sounds like a good thing ;-)
>> I've got a branch in my fork where I removed the NET_2_0 ifdefs:
>> https://github.com/akoeplinger/mono/compare/remove-net20-ifdefs, @kumpera
>> told me a while ago that removing the 2.0 profile is on the horizon when I
>> asked about why the ifdefs are still there.
>> I refrained from making a PR so far because it is quite huge, do you think
>> now would be a good time?
>> -- Alex
>> 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
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
More information about the Mono-devel-list