[Mono-dev] revert of r104029/30/31

Miguel de Icaza miguel at novell.com
Tue May 27 11:21:57 EDT 2008


> > For me, API compatibility with MS is important and as such I want to reduce 
> > the number of issues reported by our class status pages to zero (or as close 
> > as possible). Having several hundred issues reported because of mismatches 
> > in argument names can cause us to miss more important mismatches. I hope 
> > that makes it clear as to you why I want to get these argument name changes 
> > in.
> I'm in *total* agreement about fixing parameters names (even if I have
> yet to see a bug report about it) and all other issues pointed by the
> class status page (if it's not important enough to fix then it should
> not be displayed on those pages).

I have as well never seen an issue related to parameter names, but I
remember that they are normative and apparently they are supposed to be
used by languages that might choose to do invocations like:

	WriteLine (format = "{0} bytes downloaded", object = bytes);

I have yet to see this in the wild myself.

More information about the Mono-devel-list mailing list