Ayende @ Rahien

Hi!
My name is Oren Eini
Founder of Hibernating Rhinos LTD and RavenDB.
You can reach me by phone or email:

ayende@ayende.com

+972 52-548-6969

, @ Q c

Posts: 18 | Comments: 72

filter by tags archive

Comments

Yitzchok

Interesting catch

Who has the mistake?

Ayende Rahien

Both can be argued to be correct.

The problem is not that, it is that there is a difference.

Chris Patterson

So now that the source to the CLR is viewable by the public, how does that impact the mono project and future versions I wonder?

Ayende Rahien

Same as always, if you look at CLR code, please don't contribute to Mono

Simon

Mono is correct because it does not use crappy "m_" prefixing for member types. ;)

Scott Hanselman

Shoot! Now that I've glanced at this post, I can't go fix this bug for you! AARGH! My eyes! ;)

josh

Maybe you should have put a spoiler warning on this for any mono devs. I wouldn't be surprised if some were among your readers.

Ayende Rahien

This did not come from the CLR sources. This is a reflector output.

Beside, I frankly doubt that anyone will reveal the secret of PROPERTY GETTERS

josh

@Hanselmen, don't worry the mono team has an official eye bleach for just this sort of situation.

Stefan Wenig

gotta get one of those: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7vqvdwkvJk&NR=1

firefly

Good catch :) So what does CheckDisposed() do? throw an exception if the object is disposed?

Jarrod M

I ran into a few things like this when working with Mainsoft (which uses Mono source to cross compile to java with their compiler).

By the way, what do you use to create your diagrams?

MIguel de Icaza

We only use m_ names when we are forced by something like remoting (which likes to send reflection-based internal field names across the wire).

Otherwise we stay away from that horrible practice.

Miguel

Comment preview

Comments have been closed on this topic.

FUTURE POSTS

  1. RavenDB 3.0 New Stable Release - 15 hours from now
  2. Production postmortem: The industry at large - about one day from now
  3. The insidious cost of allocations - 3 days from now
  4. Buffer allocation strategies: A possible solution - 6 days from now
  5. Buffer allocation strategies: Explaining the solution - 7 days from now

And 3 more posts are pending...

There are posts all the way to Sep 11, 2015

RECENT SERIES

  1. Find the bug (5):
    20 Apr 2011 - Why do I get a Null Reference Exception?
  2. Production postmortem (10):
    01 Sep 2015 - The case of the lying configuration file
  3. What is new in RavenDB 3.5 (7):
    12 Aug 2015 - Monitoring support
  4. Career planning (6):
    24 Jul 2015 - The immortal choices aren't
View all series

RECENT COMMENTS

Syndication

Main feed Feed Stats
Comments feed   Comments Feed Stats