[Mono-dev] Arguing for reconsideration of WONTFIX status of 425512

Stifu stifu at free.fr
Thu Feb 12 08:56:20 EST 2009

Your opinion makes sense, but then, why bother with Windows.Forms (or other
things like pseudo-Windows registry support), for example? The Mono team
seems a bit torn between adding "hacky" stuff for the sake of compatibility
(note: I'm not bashing, I rely on the Windows.Forms support of Mono myself),
and not trying to match .NET when easily possible (like this post from
yesterday shows: http://www.go-mono.com/forums/).

Jérémie LAVAL wrote:
> However,  I think Mono isn't meant to be a *reimplementation* of .NET,
> it's
> an implementation of the *specifications* defined at ECMA/ISO.
> Now, if developers are using implementation specific details they are
> shooting themselves in the foot and should go fix their mess themselves,
> not
> blame Mono for it.
> Again, just my humble opinion.
> --
> Jérémie Laval
> jeremie.laval at gmail.com
> http://garuma.wordpress.com

View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Arguing-for-reconsideration-of-WONTFIX-status-of-425512-tp21975511p21976573.html
Sent from the Mono - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the Mono-devel-list mailing list