Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. VS2008/2010 backwards compatibility

VS2008/2010 backwards compatibility

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
csharpcomquestion
12 Posts 8 Posters 14 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • L Offline
    L Offline
    Lost User
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    How reliable is the ability to build .NET 2.0 compatible projects under more recent editions? Just wondering.

    Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.

    L P L I J 6 Replies Last reply
    0
    • L Lost User

      How reliable is the ability to build .NET 2.0 compatible projects under more recent editions? Just wondering.

      Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.

      L Offline
      L Offline
      Lost User
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      VS2008: Never had a problem with .NET 2.0 things, and that's what I target most, so I probably would have noticed if something were wrong with it VS2010: not tested, I don't have it

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • L Lost User

        How reliable is the ability to build .NET 2.0 compatible projects under more recent editions? Just wondering.

        Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.

        P Offline
        P Offline
        Pete OHanlon
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        It's fine - you just don't get the later assemblies if you target .NET 2.

        "WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith

        As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.

        My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx

        V 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • L Lost User

          How reliable is the ability to build .NET 2.0 compatible projects under more recent editions? Just wondering.

          Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.

          L Offline
          L Offline
          Luc Pattyn
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          have VS2008 build for .NET 2.0 works fine for me, it is what I do most often. :)

          Luc Pattyn

          :badger: :jig: :badger:

          Have a look at my entry for the lean-and-mean competition; please provide comments, feedback, discussion, and don’t forget to vote for it! Thank you.

          :jig: :badger: :jig:

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • L Lost User

            How reliable is the ability to build .NET 2.0 compatible projects under more recent editions? Just wondering.

            Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.

            I Offline
            I Offline
            i i i
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            well .NET Framework 3.0, version 3.5 uses the CLR of version 2.0 :)

            Best Of Regards, SOFTDEV Sad like books with torn pages, sad like unfinished stories ...

            V 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • I i i i

              well .NET Framework 3.0, version 3.5 uses the CLR of version 2.0 :)

              Best Of Regards, SOFTDEV Sad like books with torn pages, sad like unfinished stories ...

              V Offline
              V Offline
              Vikram A Punathambekar
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              Any idea about .NET 4.0? I had a cursory look on Google, but didn't get anything conclusive.

              Cheers, Vikram. (Cracked not one CCC, but two!)

              S 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • P Pete OHanlon

                It's fine - you just don't get the later assemblies if you target .NET 2.

                "WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith

                As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.

                My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx

                V Offline
                V Offline
                Vikram A Punathambekar
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                But you can add them as references since they use CLR 2.0, can't you? I've used assemblies that were introduced as part of .NET 3.5 with a VS 2005 project, and they worked just fine. I imagine you could do the same with VS 2008 while still targeting .NET 2.0....

                Cheers, Vikram. (Cracked not one CCC, but two!)

                P 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • V Vikram A Punathambekar

                  Any idea about .NET 4.0? I had a cursory look on Google, but didn't get anything conclusive.

                  Cheers, Vikram. (Cracked not one CCC, but two!)

                  S Offline
                  S Offline
                  S Senthil Kumar
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  Vikram A Punathambekar wrote:

                  Any idea about .NET 4.0

                  I'm fairly certain it won't run on CLR 2.0 - language features like dynamic and No PIA would require major changes in the CLR.

                  Regards Senthil _____________________________ My Home Page |My Blog | My Articles | My Flickr | WinMacro

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • L Lost User

                    How reliable is the ability to build .NET 2.0 compatible projects under more recent editions? Just wondering.

                    Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.

                    J Offline
                    J Offline
                    J Dunlap
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #9

                    Works just fine - I've developed both WinForms and ASP.NET apps that target .NET 2.0 using VS2008. The only thing that's ever been an issue is when someone else needs to use the same .sln and .csproj files and doesn't have VS2008. I've also developed a small utility that targets .NET 2.0 using VS2010, so by all indications I've seen, that compatibility will continue.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • L Lost User

                      How reliable is the ability to build .NET 2.0 compatible projects under more recent editions? Just wondering.

                      Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.

                      B Offline
                      B Offline
                      Brad Raulston
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #10

                      Works just fine. Once you upgrade a project to VS 2010 the prj and sln files are updated as well so you won't be able to reopen in VS2008.

                      Brad

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • V Vikram A Punathambekar

                        But you can add them as references since they use CLR 2.0, can't you? I've used assemblies that were introduced as part of .NET 3.5 with a VS 2005 project, and they worked just fine. I imagine you could do the same with VS 2008 while still targeting .NET 2.0....

                        Cheers, Vikram. (Cracked not one CCC, but two!)

                        P Offline
                        P Offline
                        Pete OHanlon
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #11

                        But it stops being a .NET 2 app at this stage - you are requiring the client to download a later version of the framework if they haven't got it installed.

                        "WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith

                        As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.

                        My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx

                        V 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • P Pete OHanlon

                          But it stops being a .NET 2 app at this stage - you are requiring the client to download a later version of the framework if they haven't got it installed.

                          "WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith

                          As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.

                          My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx

                          V Offline
                          V Offline
                          Vikram A Punathambekar
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #12

                          Pete O'Hanlon wrote:

                          you are requiring the client to download a later version of the framework if they haven't got it installed

                          Not really. If you only require one or two 3.5-specific DLLs, you can copy them over to your 2.0-only dev machine, add them as references, build your app, and distribute it to clients who have only 2.0. (Obviously you will have to distribute the 3.5-specific DLLs with your app.) The app will run just fine. I did it as recently as this year in a highly controlled environment. (If it doesn't/didn't work for you, pl let me know - I would be very surprised and might dig around to find out why.)

                          Cheers, Vikram. (Cracked not one CCC, but two!)

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          Reply
                          • Reply as topic
                          Log in to reply
                          • Oldest to Newest
                          • Newest to Oldest
                          • Most Votes


                          • Login

                          • Don't have an account? Register

                          • Login or register to search.
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          0
                          • Categories
                          • Recent
                          • Tags
                          • Popular
                          • World
                          • Users
                          • Groups