[Mono-dev] should we really use Mono[NotSupported|Limitation|Blah]Attributes?

[Jonathan Pobst]

MoMA has been updated to report:
- MonoTODO
- MonoLimitation
- MonoNotSupported

It will not report:
- MonoDocumentationNote
- MonoExtension
- MonoInternalNote

However, they all just show as "TODO" on MoMA reports/GUI, so developers 
are still encouraged to include a message explaining what is missing. 
This is a definition file change, so if you are using definition files 
for 1.2.3 or 1.2.4, you have this update.  You do not need a new version 
of MoMA.

The class status pages have not been modified, and currently only report 
the traditional MonoTODO.

Jon


Atsushi Eno wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I just noticed that after replacing MonoTODO attributes with one
> of those derived ones such as MonoNotSupported, they get *hidden*
> from the class status pages. As a result, we're getting wrong MoMA
> reports. Is it really intended, or should we avoid using those
> derived attributes? (For example see
> System.ComponentModel.MemberDescriptor.GetInvocationTarget() in
> System.dll)
> 
> I don't think those attributes are ready to be used unless
> corcompare stuff are changed to consider them.
> 
> Atsushi Eno
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
> 
>