[Mono-dev] [PATCH] System.Configuration.Provider.ProviderBase.cs

John Anderson sontek at gmail.com
Fri Aug 31 04:19:13 EDT 2007

On 8/31/07, Atsushi Eno <atsushi at ximian.com> wrote:
> Your code does not verify that your change must be correct. It
> just shows the fact that it *affects* on our ASP.NET behavior
> (Or is that a general way for .NET developers to identify the
> source of bugs?).  What I expected was rather like below:
> using System;
> using System.Collections.Specialized;
> using System.Configuration.Provider;
> public class MyProvider : ProviderBase
> {
>      public static void Main ()
>      {
>          NameValueCollection config = new NameValueCollection ();
>          config ["name"] = "Name";
>          config ["description"] = "DESC";
>          config ["foo"] = "FOO";
>          Console.WriteLine (config ["description"]);
>          MyProvider p = new MyProvider ();
>          p.Initialize ("Foo", config);
>          Console.WriteLine (config ["name"]);
>          Console.WriteLine (config ["description"]);
>          Console.WriteLine (config ["foo"]);
>          Console.WriteLine ("{0} {1}", p.Name, p.Description);
>      }
> }
> Yes, you were right, this test shows how funny behavior .net does.

Sorry about my test, Yours is much better.  But as you can see with your
test, on MS.NET
it removes the description config.  This is a pretty well known behavior of
the provider, I've seen
many code examples of custom providers where they check config after running
base initialize to check
if any unknown attributes were defined in the config.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ximian.com/pipermail/mono-devel-list/attachments/20070831/7ea76aa5/attachment.html 

More information about the Mono-devel-list mailing list