http://ayende.comAyende @ RahienCopyright (C) Ayende Rahien 2004 - 2021 (c) 202660@Oren I do understand your concern, and appreciate the feedback. Personally, I am a big fan of generic specialization :-) My post was meant to be factual and explain why things are the way that they are currently. Based on our discussion, I wil be talking to the team and we will see what if anything we can do to further bring type into the picture. We have already made a bunch of changes in our forthcoming drop to allow contract binding to be stronger and include type information. We may be able to take this even fruther. Thanks Glenn @zihotki can you clarify this statement? How is this similar? http://ayende.com/3920/mef-open-generic-types#comment3http://ayende.com/3920/mef-open-generic-types#comment3Mon, 23 Mar 2009 03:20:07 GMTI saw Glenn's post and some tweets between you two while on vacation this week. But I glossed over the details and implications because my mind was elsewhere, only thought that it was surprising. I thought Glenn's explanation was reasonable, and you're concerns are too. I probably won't get the impact until I use MEF.. or my brain goes back into full time work mode. http://ayende.com/3920/mef-open-generic-types#comment2http://ayende.com/3920/mef-open-generic-types#comment2Sun, 22 Mar 2009 21:47:40 GMTIt seems to me that I have a déjà vu. Situation with EF was very similar to this.. http://ayende.com/3920/mef-open-generic-types#comment1http://ayende.com/3920/mef-open-generic-types#comment1Sun, 22 Mar 2009 18:27:39 GMT