[Mono-devel-list] xml serialization framework

Adam Chester achester at bigpond.com
Thu Apr 24 04:10:00 EDT 2003

It is probably best to go with CodeDom and it seems this is what MS
does. As Miguel's wiki guidelines point out, it might take a long time
to develop and debug a Reflection.Emit based implementation.

You would only use Reflection.Emit if you needed to re-generate the code
often (as opposed to just once), the only benefit is avoid the
time-expensive compile step. I'm pretty sure you can cache the results
of compilation of the CodeDom output for the majority of cases. I think
MS implementation does this too for Xml Serialization.

- Adam

-----Original Message-----
From: mono-devel-list-admin at lists.ximian.com
[mailto:mono-devel-list-admin at lists.ximian.com] On Behalf Of Miguel de
Sent: Thursday, 24 April 2003 3:51 PM
To: Erik LeBel
Cc: Atsushi; monodev
Subject: Re: [Mono-devel-list] xml serialization framework


   I wanted to contribute to this:

> same serializer-reflection framework. Should generators use CodeDom or

> Reflection.Emit to do the work? (CodeDom would require post-compiling 
> and is still far from complete. I?m hoping to spend some time on this 
> later as it will be useful for Web-Service proxy generation with
> WSDL.exe) MS?s generated code is messy and uses some very cryptic 
> naming conventions. Compatibility may require us to map these 
> conventions, but I hate to see things written so poorly.

    I have written a few guidelines on code generation techniques, and
put them on the Mono Wiki:


Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com

More information about the Mono-devel-list mailing list