Geek Answers Handbook

Practical limitations with nodes not marked as CLS compatible?

As the author of the OSS library, I have always tried to make my CLS material compatible. But MS does not make it easy. They often put you in a catch-22 situation, such as:

  • You cannot have a protected variable that differs only in the case of a public one.
  • You cannot have protected or public variables starting with an underscore or "m_".
  • If you want to make a class truly extensible, you often need to have protected variables that match public properties. Your least ugly way out is to add a suffix to a variable, such as “Var” or “Value”. This is unpleasant and unacceptable to me. I like the clean code.

I do not know a single .NET language that does not support variables starting with an underscore, and I used them in many places where the variable should be visible to subclasses.

I'm tired of warnings, and plan to disable assembly level CLS compliance on my 30+ C # books.

Are there any actual issues with disabling CLS library compliance? Any real problems with this?

Microsoft has issued compelling software recommendations for decades, with less than 5% of them worth the bytes into which it was encoded. I cannot find any evidence that this best practice has any effect on anything.

But, to be careful, I check.

, : DLL CLSCompliant?

, MS.

, IronPython, IronRuby F # , , , , .

, CLS-, .

+5
2

, , , .

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bhc3fa7f.aspx

, "" , , - ( ).

CLS MS ( ):

, CLS,

catch-22, . , - CLS.

+5

, :

  • getter, , .
  • , . , setter .
  • .

: . .

+4

More articles:


All Articles