Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

mono 5.0 - xbuild deprecated, C# 7.0, concurrent garbage collector #464

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
den-run-ai opened this issue May 12, 2017 · 4 comments · Fixed by #471
Closed

mono 5.0 - xbuild deprecated, C# 7.0, concurrent garbage collector #464

den-run-ai opened this issue May 12, 2017 · 4 comments · Fixed by #471

Comments

@den-run-ai
Copy link
Contributor

http://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/releases/5.0.0/

@vmuriart
Copy link
Contributor

I've frozen the language to C# 6.0 when C# 7.0 features were rolling out. I don't want to upgrade the language (atleast not now).

GC... I still have nightmares about our current GC setup, I don't think we want to further complicate it.

The only actionable item I see here is the xbuild deprecation (i assume this will affect our Travis CI eventually) We'll have to play around w it to see how to set it up.

@den-run-ai
Copy link
Contributor Author

I agree on C# 6.0 and xbuild, not sure about GC. Together with C#6.0 and xbuild, also underlying compiler is updated from "mcs" to "csc" (roslyn).

@wesnerm
Copy link

wesnerm commented Jan 8, 2018

Is it possible to add the C# 7.0 support back in, since competitive programming sites aren't using the csc build because it takes too much memory and the compiler is killed by the OS?

@den-run-ai
Copy link
Contributor Author

can you give example of your problem, this does not make sense to me. so you need to use alternative to csc (mcs?) and support C# 7.0 in a code-base that calls into pythonnet?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants