Sorry it double posted as it was queued and didn't send and I sent it
again. Later my iPad apparently got wifi :) That's fair that you are
trying to avoid it but there are circumstances where it can be a good
idea. As an example if I wanted to start looking at your dependencies
with an analysis
Use conditional compilation.
On Tuesday, September 1, 2015, Edward Ned Harvey (mono) <
edward.harvey.m...@clevertrove.com> wrote:
> I've always used separate project files on windows and linux, in order to
> include different compiler symbols, in order to make projects build with
> different
On 01/09/2015 21:04, Edward Ned Harvey (mono) wrote:
> I've always used separate project files on windows and linux, in order to
> include different compiler symbols, in order to make projects build with
> different dependencies. I've been chastised here for doing it, so I'd like to
> find a
I like the advice I'm getting from Alex and Robert.
Alex, you said you're using
Path.Combine(Directory.GetCurrentDirectory(), "foobar.dll")
When I look around, it seems like this might be more reliable?
Path.Combine(AppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectory, "foobar.dll")
I'm doing
On 02/09/2015 16:32, Edward Ned Harvey (mono) wrote:
> I like the advice I'm getting from Alex and Robert.
>
> Alex, you said you're using
> Path.Combine(Directory.GetCurrentDirectory(), "foobar.dll")
>
> When I look around, it seems like this might be more reliable?
>
Use conditional compilation.
On Tuesday, September 1, 2015, Edward Ned Harvey (mono) <
edward.harvey.m...@clevertrove.com> wrote:
> I've always used separate project files on windows and linux, in order to
> include different compiler symbols, in order to make projects build with
> different
> From: Greg Young [mailto:gregoryyou...@gmail.com]
>
> Use conditional compilation.
Unless I've somehow missed your point? You said that twice, so I want to make
sure we're on the same page - You're talking about defining a compiler symbol,
and then using [Conditonal] or #if, right? The end
On 01.09.2015 22:04, Edward Ned Harvey (mono) wrote:
The workaround I've found is to create a wrapper class MonoSpecific,
so the if-clause and the Mono.Posix call are not in the same file.
But this is clearly a hack. Is there a better way?
You're depending on undefined behavior. The workaround
On Sep 2, 2015, at 9:25 AM, Robert Jordan wrote:
> A sane and easy solution is to deploy Mono.Posing on Windows side-by-side
> with you app.
Just do that — and distribute MonoPosixHelper.dll as well.
Parts of Mono.Posix.dll are supported on Windows, e.g.
I've always used separate project files on windows and linux, in order to
include different compiler symbols, in order to make projects build with
different dependencies. I've been chastised here for doing it, so I'd like to
find a better way. (Miguel and others tore apart a pull request,
10 matches
Mail list logo