Umpa Lumpa wrote:
Then why the heck are they under the System.* namespace and not
Microsoft.*?
It shouldn't matter what namespace is chosen. When using types in a program,
the type not only includes the namespace but also the name of the assembly.
This is a huge improvement over previous standards choices. Reserving a
namespace for the purpose of a standard is an easy way to create a mess.
Because the namespace of a type includes the assembly name, several
assemblies (even in the same program) can use the same namespace name with
completely different types. It does not hinder the progress of other library
vendors.
If you are concerned about ensuring your program is portable using only the
features of the ECMA and ISO standards, you can build and run the program
with the Shared Source CLI implementation.
Of course, I don't work on the frameworks, so I can't say with any authority
as to why they chose the namespaces they did. All I can say is that it
shouldn't have any impact on developers, they should just be usable.
Cheerio!
--
Brandon Bray Visual C++ Compiler
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.