lucenenet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Luis Fco. Ramirez Daza Glez" <luisfc...@yahoo.com.mx>
Subject RE: Vote for CLS Compliance
Date Thu, 10 Apr 2014 17:17:24 GMT
+1 CLS Compliance
We use Lucene.NET in VB.NET, so please keep CLS compliance.

And thanks for all your work!!!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Irwin [mailto:pirwin@feature23.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 12:11 PM
> To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Vote for CLS Compliance
> 
> My vote is yes, since CLS compliance only applies to the public methods
and
> properties. We should still strongly consider using sbyte internally to
maintain
> logic compatibility with Java.
> 
> IMHO: If there are public members that would require a Buffer.BlockCopy
> byte[]-to-sbyte[] conversion, we should consider warning the user that the
> performance may be impacted, and maintain an overload/alternative sbyte[]
> method that is usable by C# callers without the performance impact, by
> marking those methods as [CLSCompliant(false)] while retaining the
> [assembly:CLSCompliant(true)] at the assembly level. Said another way,
let's
> allow for the sbyte[] public members with the [CLSCompliant(false)]
> attribute on the method, but make sure we have CLS-compliant alternatives.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Zachary Gramana
> <zgramana@gmail.com>wrote:
> 
> > +1 And across languages! : )
> >
> > On Apr 10, 2014, at 9:43 AM, Prescott Nasser <geobmx540@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I think this is important to achieve to really make this available
> > > cross
> > platform.
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: michael herndon<mailto:mherndon@michaelherndon.com>
> > > Sent: 4/10/2014 6:02 AM
> > > To: dev@lucenenet.apache.org<mailto:dev@lucenenet.apache.org>
> > > Subject: Vote for CLS Compliance
> > >
> > > Cross Language Specification Compliance Vote
> > >
> > > This vote is to make Lucene.Net CLS Compliant moving forward with
> > > version 4.
> > >
> > > The benefit of CLS Compliance is that other languages on the .NET
> > > Runtime can use Lucene.Net. There have been issues with in the past
> > > where people using VB.NET could not consume parts of the library
> > > because it was not Compliant.
> > >
> > > The con is that it will take time and effort to get this right.
> > >
> > > Feel free to discuss the pros and cons before voting.
> > >
> > > *voting rules*: https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> > > *compliance documentation*:
> > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/12a7a7h3(v=vs.110).aspx
> > >
> > > -M
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Paul Irwin
> Lead Software Engineer
> feature[23]
> 
> Email: pirwin@feature23.com
> Cell: 863-698-9294


Mime
View raw message