Joshua Tauberer wrote: > > If MSDN says it is thread safe for transformation, then that is wrong. > > If it were correct, it requires whatever no one can achieve. > > Not to go all semantics on you, but an API can't be wrong. Inconsistent,
What I said wrong here is MSDN documentation, not API (and yes as you say, I don't think differentiating them here is very productive). > yes. But if it's inconsistent, that doesn't tell you which way to > resolve the inconsistency. It seems perfectly sensible to resolve the > inconsistency by saying "so long as any scripts and extension functions > are also thread safe". So it falls back to my second reply: I don't think we welcome "x is thread safe" "y is not" sort of complication. (And I don't forget the performance issue in your change yet.) Atsushi Eno _______________________________________________ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list