The "concern" is it goes crashity-crash-crash.
Picture this:
- you have an add-in for Word.
- your add-in uses COM and .NET (and .NET datasets).
When .NET 1.1 is installed, this works. When .NET 2.0 is installed, it
doesn't.
The reason is that some classes used by the DataSet are not COM visible.
COM visibility worked differently in .NET 1.1, so the system worked. Now
that .NET 2.0 is on Windows Update as a recommended download, people are
installing it. By default, it's the version that programs (like Word) will
load to load .NET assemblies. So as soon as users install .NET 2.0, the
Word add-in they were previously happily working away on fails to run.
This is one of the breaking changes listed by Microsoft, and it makes me
weep every time I hear someone spout the "backwards compatibility" line.
It's just not true - especially for hosts like Office, where one add-in may
be built on .NET 1.1 assumptions and another may be built on .NET 2.0
assumptions. In this case, you can't even override the default runtime
setting via the config - no matter which one you choose, one add-in will
fail.
Luckily, this one isn't in my project... I've just been an observer.
Geoff
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion of advanced .NET topics. [mailto:ADVANCED-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Lanouette
> Sent: 21 December 2005 17:56
> To: ADVANCED-DOTNET@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM
> Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] runtime framework targeting
>
> What's the concern about using a later version of the framwork? Are
> your clients complaining about upgrading? Remember that you can have
> all 3 versions on the same machine without conflict. And, they are
> free, so cost shouldn't be an issue.
>
>
> One suggestion: consider putting the code that requires a later
> framework into a webservice. Then, only the web server needs to have
> a specific version of the framework.
>
> HTH.
>
>
> On 12/21/05, Geoff Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > One reason is that there are some pretty significant breaking changes in
> the
> > COM layer. The COMVisible attribute now works differently, and the
> > difference is particularly problematic with datasets. If you used
> datasets
> > in COM with .NET 1.1, your code probably won't run in .NET 2.
> >
> > (Or so I'm told.)
> >
> > Geoff
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Discussion of advanced .NET topics. [mailto:ADVANCED-
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ted Neward
> > > Sent: 21 December 2005 00:01
> > > To: ADVANCED-DOTNET@DISCUSS.DEVELOP.COM
> > > Subject: Re: [ADVANCED-DOTNET] runtime framework targeting
> > >
> > > Why would an assembly want to change the version of the runtime it
> wants
> > > to
> > > target anyway? What's your use case here? I'm curious.
> > >
> > > Ted Neward
> > > Author, Presenter, Consultant
> > > Java, .NET, XML services
> > > http://blogs.tedneward.com
> >
> > ===================================
> > This list is hosted by DevelopMentor(r) http://www.develop.com
> >
> > View archives and manage your subscription(s) at
> http://discuss.develop.com
> >
>
>
> --
> ______________________________
> - David Lanouette
> - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> ===================================
> This list is hosted by DevelopMentorR http://www.develop.com
>
> View archives and manage your subscription(s) at
> http://discuss.develop.com
===================================
This list is hosted by DevelopMentor® http://www.develop.com
View archives and manage your subscription(s) at http://discuss.develop.com
