[Mono-dev] Why do we need separate I18N assemblies?

[Atsushi Eno]

I once dreamed to change encoding implementation like you but
I noticed that it helps few people other than my personal
satisfaction and spends too much time just for such a niche
(at least for me).

When you split conversion map data from I18N.*.dll which is mostly
extraneous for people who don't use those them, feel free to try
merging it into mscorlib. Otherwise, I don't like your idea.

I don't think those who do not install the whole mono and install
partial packages are likely to miss mono-locale-extras, or if they
do miss it, its their blame. Such newbies should have installed the
whole mono.

Why do you quote Microsoft mscorlib size here? It is far from
something to do with it. Stop making misleading. To my understanding
they have different files for encoding maps (*.nlp).

"Mono should be MS.NET compatible" is simply wrong as usual.
We have broader supported environment which requires different
thinking.

Atsushi Eno

Kornél Pál wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I think we have I18N assemblies because Portable.Net had them (it still has 
> but that's not important) as well when they were ported to Mono.
> 
> Having tham has the advantage that people don't have to install them if they 
> don't need them. But Mono should be MS.NET compatible that support a lot of 
> encodings by default so people assume it when writing applications and thus 
> I don't think that it's good not to install encoding.
> 
> Anyway it could be much easier to have them in corlib, so they could take 
> advantage of corlib internals and have a list of them rather than using 
> reflection that is slow.
> 
> This would increase the size of corlib but MS.NET 2.0 has an mscorlib.dll of 
> size 4,10 MB so ours still would be smaller.:)
> 
> Kornél 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
>