[Mono-list] remoting mono with MS' CLR?

[2a5gjx302@sneakemail.com]

At 01:21 PM 06/07/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>Hello,
>
>> Serializing the collection classes would require the collection classes
>> to be an exact clone of the Microsoft classes.  Not only do the field
>> names have to match exactly, but the underlying implementation
>> (how/when/where those fields are used) has to match exactly too.
>
>Good point Thong.   
>
>In a few cases, we might be able to change the implementation to match
>the Microsoft runtime behavior, to maximize interop.  It is not perfect,
>but at least worth trying.

Nobody seemed to notice, but the suggestion I made was that the
serialization routines be made to convert an in-memory mono-style
collection instance to a serialized MS-style collection instance (and
vice-versa for deserialization). It would be done by explicitly checking
for certain types during the serialization process and handling them as
special cases. This would likely be very easy to implement, and it would
allow the mono collection classes to remain unchanged.

Jonathan