gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies)

My feedback

  1. 2 votes
    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)

      We’ll send you updates on this idea

      gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

      Michael, thank you for your feedback. I understand from your support request that you need a version of CheckAccess that disrigards [ExplicitlySynchronized]. Is that correct?

    • 1 vote
      Sign in
      Check!
      (thinking…)
      Reset
      or sign in with
      • facebook
      • google
        Password icon
        I agree to the terms of service
        Signed in as (Sign out)

        We’ll send you updates on this idea

        gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

        Thank you for your feedback.

        1. Topmost window: you are right. This used to be a workaround for a window positioning problem but this is annoying and will be fixed.

        2. Too many steps: it seems 2 of them can be removed easily. we'll do that.

        3. Snarky wording. This is your opinion, but this is not fact-based. We'll continue to gather data about the efficiency of this approach and take a decision accordingly.

      • 1 vote
        Sign in
        Check!
        (thinking…)
        Reset
        or sign in with
        • facebook
        • google
          Password icon
          I agree to the terms of service
          Signed in as (Sign out)

          We’ll send you updates on this idea

          gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

          PostSharp 5 with detect changes not only in the main psproj file, but also in all dependencies of the psproj file.

        • 1 vote
          Sign in
          Check!
          (thinking…)
          Reset
          or sign in with
          • facebook
          • google
            Password icon
            I agree to the terms of service
            Signed in as (Sign out)

            We’ll send you updates on this idea

            gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

            Okay, I updated the request title.

            gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

            Introducing non-static members would be possible but I don't understand how this would address your need with module initializers.

          • 1 vote
            Sign in
            Check!
            (thinking…)
            Reset
            or sign in with
            • facebook
            • google
              Password icon
              I agree to the terms of service
              Signed in as (Sign out)

              We’ll send you updates on this idea

              gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

              It seems to me that a better idea would be to expose our Multicast engine as an API (method call), so you could use it from a MethodPointcut. What do you think?

            • 2 votes
              Sign in
              Check!
              (thinking…)
              Reset
              or sign in with
              • facebook
              • google
                Password icon
                I agree to the terms of service
                Signed in as (Sign out)

                We’ll send you updates on this idea

                gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

                I think what you are describing is a hybrid between Synchronized and Freezable. A "freezable synchronized" instead of a "freezable thread-affine". This is feasible but let's see if there are enough people interested in this model.

              • 33 votes
                Sign in
                Check!
                (thinking…)
                Reset
                or sign in with
                • facebook
                • google
                  Password icon
                  I agree to the terms of service
                  Signed in as (Sign out)

                  We’ll send you updates on this idea

                  gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

                  We're reworked the plan last week and 4.4 is going to be scaled down and merged with 5.0. Work should begin in July, so we're one quarter late.

                  Note that in theory you should be able to repackage PostSharp yourself with relatively little work. An alternative is to use the "zip" deployment option that is now supported in PostSharp 4.3 but not yet documented.

                • 36 votes
                  Sign in
                  Check!
                  (thinking…)
                  Reset
                  or sign in with
                  • facebook
                  • google
                    Password icon
                    I agree to the terms of service
                    Signed in as (Sign out)

                    We’ll send you updates on this idea

                    gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

                    Serilog will be supported in PostSharp 5.

                  • 55 votes
                    Sign in
                    Check!
                    (thinking…)
                    Reset
                    or sign in with
                    • facebook
                    • google
                      Password icon
                      I agree to the terms of service
                      Signed in as (Sign out)

                      We’ll send you updates on this idea

                      gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

                      In my understanding, .NET Native is only required when you deploy to Windows Store.

                      gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) shared this idea  · 
                    • 19 votes
                      Sign in
                      Check!
                      (thinking…)
                      Reset
                      or sign in with
                      • facebook
                      • google
                        Password icon
                        I agree to the terms of service
                        Signed in as (Sign out)

                        We’ll send you updates on this idea

                        gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

                        We currently don't have a good ETA for Mono support at build-time. We are considering providing only .NET Core support at build time with hope it could support the Mono compiler too.

                        gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) shared this idea  · 
                      • 37 votes
                        Sign in
                        Check!
                        (thinking…)
                        Reset
                        or sign in with
                        • facebook
                        • google
                          Password icon
                          I agree to the terms of service
                          Signed in as (Sign out)

                          We’ll send you updates on this idea

                          gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

                          @Kyle I understand your disappointment but this is not constructive feedback. Our OnMethodBoundary aspect does support async methods but not all features of the aspect support async methods. There is no guarantee that we will be able to support all aspect features for async methods, as we have to cope with technical limitations and high complexity.

                          gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) shared this idea  · 
                        • 34 votes
                          Sign in
                          Check!
                          (thinking…)
                          Reset
                          or sign in with
                          • facebook
                          • google
                            Password icon
                            I agree to the terms of service
                            Signed in as (Sign out)

                            We’ll send you updates on this idea

                            gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

                            Gustin,

                            Thank you for your feedback. it is important for us to understand that there is real demand for .NET Core.

                            The feature is still planned for 4.4. For more, see https://www.postsharp.net/support/roadmap.

                            -gael

                            gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) shared this idea  · 
                          • 43 votes
                            Sign in
                            Check!
                            (thinking…)
                            Reset
                            or sign in with
                            • facebook
                            • google
                              Password icon
                              I agree to the terms of service
                              Signed in as (Sign out)

                              We’ll send you updates on this idea

                              gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

                              @Mike-EEE - could you describe your scenario for XAML and serialized entities?

                              gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

                              We didn't decide to implement so no ETA.

                            • 13 votes
                              Sign in
                              Check!
                              (thinking…)
                              Reset
                              or sign in with
                              • facebook
                              • google
                                Password icon
                                I agree to the terms of service
                                Signed in as (Sign out)

                                We’ll send you updates on this idea

                                gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

                                Dave, if your request is to be able to pass delegates to custom attributes, I'm afraid we will not be able to provide any improvement because as you mentioned it's a limitation of the C# / CIL spec. However you can use IAspectProvider.

                                Under this story, I am looking for kinds of transformations that you wish were available but are not. For instance, introduce member with variable name and signature. What would make it possible to implement the Command pattern.

                                gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) shared this idea  · 
                              • 25 votes
                                Sign in
                                Check!
                                (thinking…)
                                Reset
                                or sign in with
                                • facebook
                                • google
                                  Password icon
                                  I agree to the terms of service
                                  Signed in as (Sign out)

                                  We’ll send you updates on this idea

                                  gfraiteurAdmingfraiteur (Admin, PostSharp Technologies) commented  · 

                                  I don't understand the use of this feature so I'm calling the supporters to comment. LogException rethrows the exception -- it does not swallow it. So, you are going to get a log item from the LogException for all methods in the call stack. So basically these log items already create some call stack. So, I wonder why you would need to include the call stack in each exception log item -- since there is one log item for each method in the call stack (or at least each user method).

                                  Normally, you would want to include the full code stack when the exception is swallowed, or when the exception "flies out", in the last-chance exception handler, but not when the exception is rethrown.

                                  Could you point where my reasoning is wrong?

                                  -gael

                                Feedback and Knowledge Base