►
Description
In this review, we'll review two proposals:
- an API for disassembling IL
- a subset of System.Drawing that contains the primitives
B
C
B
B
One
button
screen
21
some
references
which
one
we
start
with,
that
one
or
the
other
all
right
sit
sounds
good,
so
then
I
think
it
will
be
good.
If
one
of
you
guys
could
give
an
overview
of,
would
resent
it
right
there,
what
we,
what
we
actually
did
there
and
what
the
goals
are
and
then
you
should
probably
look
at
the
sample
code
first
before
we
actually
look
at
the
api's.
Let
me
bring
this
guy
back
up.
F
B
F
B
F
F
A
A
Any
other
nice
thing
is
from
a
Rosslyn
perspective.
We
use
I'll
task
them
in
our
unit
test
all
the
time,
but
we
have
to
shell
out
to
a
process,
get
the
dumb
things
on
disk.
Sorry,
it's
a
expensive
in
terms
of
Perth
and
somewhat
inconvenient,
because
cross-platform
having
it
as
a
library
would
be
convenient
for
us,
because
you
can
avoid
Shelley
now
and
be
cross-platform,
but
you
gotta
see
the
code.
You
use
the
librarian,
they
get
the
tests
like
what
would
you
be
looking
at
so
in
unit
4
I'll
as
fried
as
I'm?
A
Very
often
we
compile
things
and
we
just
want
to
know
like
it
be
admit,
the
right
out
coats.
So
there
are
very
specific
things
in
c-sharp
Princeton's
compound
operators
like
+
equals
minus
equals.
It
requires
a
very
specific
cochin
from
us
to
get
correct.
We
can
do
kind
of
you
know,
write
a
program,
make
sure
it
outputs
the
right
thing,
but
it's
much
better
at
just
say:
hey
look.
F
Of
his
project,
we
also
go
into
the
message
body
parsing,
which
was
not
part
of
the
later.
Even
so
you
can
live.
You
haven't
gotten
the
information
right
now
in
Madrid
or
exhale
urbana,
just
a
blob
before
moldavite
stream,
and
now
we
have
with
processing
that
into
nice.
My
system
detect
objects
that
you
can.
C
A
E
A
F
A
F
D
C
G
G
So
we
have
a
bunch
of
hooks
which
are
specific
to
test
where
you
set
the
flag,
saying
like
don't,
dump
the
method
bodies
put
them
on
a
hash
table
on
the
side,
because
after
running
this
piece
of
code,
we
can
also,
we
will
also
examine
the
quality
of
the
code.
Yet
so
like
the
plus
plus
there's
like
so
many
ways
to
admit
food
plus
plus
some
ways
are
better
than
others.
We
want
to
see
that
so
a
lot
of
this
machinery
would
be
unnecessary
if
we
could
just
read
that
assembly
from.
G
Yes,
I
one:
currently
we
have
groups
which
keep
the
metal
bodies
and
keep
the
meta
data
and
everything,
because
when
we
will
start
visualizing,
I
all
need
the
tokens
and
their
language
specific
so
that
it's
there
are
meters
there
would
which
takes
like
five
generic
type
parameters
and
bunch
of
landis.
Just
just
to
support
this
language,
independent
in
the.
G
D
So
I
understand
that
the
metadata
reader
is
very
low
level
and
when
we
wrote
that
it
was,
we
thought
you
know
it's
very
useful
for
Rosalyn,
maybe
a
couple
other
things,
but
someone
would
need
to
write
something
on
top
of
it
to
have
an
easily
consumable
library
just
to
do
general,
Ike,
reflection,
stuff.
So
does
this?
Does
this
library
fit
that
or
what
pieces
of
that
does
this
library
sit
I,
don't.
A
Actually
saying
that
you,
the
metadata,
reduce
very
low,
it
just
gives
a
very
low
reading.
The
metadata
just
brought
something
like
that:
you're
saying
basically
something
that
Rossum's
an
extremely
high
level
view
of
the
metadata
and
CCI
is
kind
of
the
middle.
This
ain't
something
more
on
the
CCI
layer.
D
A
B
B
Amberson
then
even
even
signatures,
a
hard
minute
interview
exactly
adding
that
infotech
I
think
there's
a
proposal
to
actually
add
addicted
some
sort
of
object
order
for
the
signatures,
but
it's
still
not
a
football
object
model
like
I
did
a
prototype
at
some
point
to
bed
an
object
all
over
it.
But
it's
not
quite
that
easy,
because
there's
lots
of
policy
that
that
goes
into
that
I
did
a
perfect
world
you
would
match
for
CCI
does,
which
is
it?
B
You
would
have
a
notion
of
the
resolve,
type
and
resolve
type
or
a
type
reference,
so
to
speak,
but
data
metadata
is
there's
not
like
there's
a
certain
areas
right,
that's
not
where
they
find
it.
You
can't
resolve
types
like
innings
and
tributes
and
stuff
like
that
or
construct
arguments
of
of
of
attributes.
You
kind
of
have
to
resolve
it.
Some
cases
traction
get
that
information
reliably,
but
there's
thick
we
don't
have
that
immediate
was
always
on
the
list
of
things
you
would
like
to
do,
but.
B
E
A
So
we
want
you
high
level
comments
about
the
names
now
or
go
on
the
individual
api's,
because
I
take
that
the
kind
of
thing
is
one
thing:
the
namespace
in
general,
the
library
suffix
like
everything,
the
library
and
if
we
were
thinking
about
longer
term,
we're
both
going
to
have
assemblers
and
disassemblers,
would
it
make
sense
to
put
them
under
a
shared
namespace
lights,
assistant
IL,
but
this
assembly
system
I'll
simply
or
something
of
that
nature.
I
think.
F
C
A
E
E
I
F
B
B
B
E
E
B
B
Mean
if
it's
really
contact
lee
low
level,
it
should
probably
not
even
resolve
this
md
reps,
which
to
literally
just
give
you
the
sinner
what
I'll
doesn't
on
the
command
line
does,
if
you
just
dumped
in
the
assembly,
and
that
thing
is
actually
not
in
assembly,
but
in
that
module.
It
would
give
you
that
information
and
if
you
would
dump
the
main
assembly,
it
would
probably
have
module
section
summer
and
this
point
to
the
other
module
and
think
we
should
just
nerve
of
that.
B
G
G
C
A
B
F
B
For
these
guys
here,
like
I'm
I'm,
think
we
hit
the
same
Wisconsin
metadata
video
right
because
then
they
get
already
has
very
similar
names
of
metadata
reader.
So
the
question
is:
if
you
were
to
pull
an
object,
although
we
would
immediately
collide
Nate
right
and
then
the
question
is
they'll
use
the
object
model
enter
metadata,
we're
gonna
have
now
two
types:
call
the
assembly
until
English
load
and
sometimes
called
local,
and
you
start
to
decompile.
You
have
yet
another
type
Coliseum.
Yet
another
type
called
field
yeah.
E
F
D
E
B
I
have
is
these:
this
is
object
model
that
you
have
here.
What
does
it
like?
How
would
that
fit
into
a
wall
that
we
actually
have
an
operating
model?
Well,
the
imagine
would
actually
build
an
object
model,
/
RL
thousand
right,
similar
to
cci
yeah.
How
would
that
optimal
relate
to
this
one
here,
then,.
B
J
B
C
E
D
That's
like
when
you're
those
get
created
when
you're
like
reading
an
individual
charges,
and
so
if
I
have
an
instruction
that
refers
to
a
type
in
my
own
assembly,
then
like
as
I
that
I'm
reflecting
over
parking
or
whatever
then
I'll
have
the
object,
model,
assembly
and
I'll
have
some
types
which
will
be
type
definitions.
Then
I
go
into
their
methods
and
I'm
decoding
the
methods,
and
then
they
might
have
well
it
will
it
be,
and
I'll
it'll
be
in
denial.
Adam
type
right,
I'll
be,
like
definition
and
they're
in
this
library.
J
G
B
B
So
I
mean
everything,
so
what's
the
difference
between
the
structs
and
then
they
and
then
the
classes
I
mean
there.
You
have
a
hierarchy
where
some
things
as
well,
for
my
life
doesn't
object
and
some
things
are
just
trucks
right.
Yes,
what
was
the
thing?
How
do
you
decide
which
one
is
which
one
is
which
one
to
use
so.
E
Are
the
higher
level
objects
that
are
in
hearing
from
my
eldest
object?
So
you
just
type
definition,
Augustine
method,
al-bassam
assembly
think
which
they
have
this,
which
they
share
names
and
stuff,
like
that,
like
name
name
space,
so
that
you
use
call
the
get
cat
value.
Well,
you
know
that's
market
so
that
they
don't
like
have
repeated
apologies
them
on
and,
for
example,
doesn't
feel
by
us
walk
local
and
our
last
parameter,
which
are
cash
it
on
those
objects
are
stripped
since
they
are
using
I
intervals,
so
they
are
clean
up
faster.
C
B
E
I
I
So
the
eyelid
asthma
object
class
only
as
a
protected
method.
So
you
know
it's
only
there
to
share
the
rotation
of
the
cash
I
guess
with
its
inherent
tire.
So
is
there
a
reason
that
you
couldn't
take
the
inclination
ash
its
own
helper
type
was
composed
into
the
descendants
rather
than
the
hierarchy,
so.
F
J
C
B
Alternative
design,
imagine
you
have
an
internal
object,
call,
that's
it
all,
doesn't
cash
no
and
that
basically
has
a
reference.
The
metadata
reader
like
or
some
object
that
basically
holds
on
to
the
state,
and
you
pass
that
essentially,
as
you
walk
into
the
the
object
model,
just
pass
it
to
the
things
you
hand
out
and
so
a
couple
you
disappears
on
the
API.
So
it's
just
whatever
bookkeeping
you
have
to
do
it
just
gets
elected,
it's
part
of
the
internal,
because
the
other
thing
is
like
once
you
like
in
it
technically.
B
B
J
B
The
one
thing
we
already
said
is:
we
need
to
think
about
their
names
because
there's
some
general
like,
if
you
I
mean
you
probably
won't
the
above
prefix
right,
but
then
the
question
is
I
mean
that
probably
works
out
here
right
for
these
kind
of
things,
which
are
pretty
specific
soil.
Does
these
things
here
like
a
likely
to
collide
one
way
or
the
other
would
have
to
come
up
with
some
smart
naming?
That
is
not
terrible
and
also
doesn't
collide
with
the
reader,
nor
reflection
more
and
your
object
ball.
C
J
F
J
I
J
F
B
Like
you
have
an
octave
model,
but
it's
very
much
tied
to
the
semantics.
You
need
an
aisle.
The
language
right
so
like
flags,
I
assume,
for
example,
would
give
you,
whatever
the
you
know,
IL
textual
representation
of
the
flex,
our
it
doesn't
give
you
just.
You
know
the
number
two
strained
xq
minute
so
like
this
is
not
a
general-purpose
object
model
right.
It's
very
much
essentially
object
model
for
the
textual
pieces
of
information
that
make
up
and
I'll
document
so.
I
I
Okay,
I
was
wondering,
if
you
considered
doing
like
a
visitor
pattern
to
support
either
different
methods
of
writing
these
out,
or
you
know
talking
about
the
rosslyn
test
scenario.
If
you
were
able
to
construct
yourself,
a
visitor
that
could
go
through
these
islands
directions
instead
of
having
to
walk
the
objects.
That
might
be
something
that
would
be
used.
What
he
does.
C
G
Would
it
have
something
similar
for
pdb?
Actually,
it
would
be
nice,
though
a
different
color,
the
police.
Eventually
that's
possible,
is
kind
of
have
two
modes
of
paralyzation
one
with
revises
I'll
another
religious
divide,
information
I
think
there
is
a
sort
of
merge
mode
where
actual
dial
and
puts
a
little
thing
is
they're,
saying
sequence,
points
here,
sequin
point
second
point
there
say
look
in
addition
to
looking
at
I
out.
G
B
G
So
in
PB
scenario,
current
our
current
series,
you
produce
the
assembly,
and
then
you
say
it
is
the
assembly,
give
me
method,
class,
1,
dot,
class,
2,
dot,
method,
1,
and
then
we
have
a
visitor
which
goes
through
that
object
model
provided
by
PTV
to
xml
and
finds
the
method.
And
so
will
we
have
visitors
which
are,
and
I
extracting
only
the
matter
that
we
need,
because
because
that's
how
PDP
to
xml
work
when
I
always
realization,
since
it's
completely
custom,
it
works
out
our
way.
G
He
basically
dumped
all
the
middle
simple
hash
table
I'll
play
through
and
keeps
them
around,
and
then
we
just
fetch
it
based
on
the
name.
But
it
doesn't
need
pretty
like
that.
If
you
could
be,
it
will
be
fine
to
say
what
here's
the
class
1
class
to
God
method,
to
give
me
I,
am
and
yet
or
give
mrs.
it
before.
I
G
F
G
A
Right
now
is
complaining
idea
visiting
a
topping
and
there
are
certain
things
which
then
like
an
evil
compile
dasn't
might
find
to
be
like
someone
annoying
or
some
preference
I
hate
the
fact
that
it
puts
certain
labels
on
the
left
hand,
side
nice.
It
have
sometimes
more
concise
output,
but
you
have
a
visitor.
Then
you
have
the
chance
customizing
it.
If
you
encode
it
into
the
types,
then
you
kind
of
lock
yourself
into
one
pattern,
I
think
in
general,
you
need
to
have
the
number
to
get
that
thing.
Center
cut,
yeah.
F
C
G
G
F
G
I
Comparing
sounds
like
another
reason
that
it
would
be
nice
to
have
different
implementations
of
writers
that
you
could
plug
in
as
a
visitor,
so
that
you
could
have
one
that
was
nice
and
could
change,
and
could
you
know
format
nicely
like
one
that
was
concise
and
and
and
didn't
change
it
was
designed
to
you
know
compared
to
persisted.
You
know,
test
data
currently.
G
F
But
crudely,
the
way
they
did
you
get
a
nine
or
unmute
array
of
instructions
in
each
instruction
has
its
own
type,
and
then
you
can,
like
you,
don't
have
to
call
the
dump
method
on
it.
You
just
do
a
linear
scan
up
and
then
do
whatever
you
feel
about,
like
a
tweet,
a
visitor
patterns
more
around
trees
and
there's
no,
not
really
good
tree
for
the
message.
I
understand
for
the
method,
definition
and
types
of
that
an
extensible
fall.
J
J
I
will
be
curious
to
know
you
know
they
like
how
much
time
we're
spending
like
if
like
like
like.
Are
we,
like?
You
know
re
over
designing,
maybe
if,
in
a
case
where
really
like
you
know,
you
know
something
that
you
can
really
just
switch
over
and
sort
of
like
you
could
be
potentially
like
I
got
an
instruction
like
honestly.
I
would
expect
it
like
a
method
body
representation
like
that
compressed
IL
is
really
like
slightly
annoying,
but
like
I
can't
imagine
something
that
basically
just
I
can
take
you.
J
This
block,
that's
pretty
easy
to
walk
and
I
mean
I,
mean
I,
know
it
we're
going
into
like
patterns
of
visitors
and
so
forth.
So
it's
not
really
friendly
to
those
those
sorts
of
designs,
but
I
think
I
would.
I
would
really
curious
to
see
sort
of
the
code
samples
of
what
we
need
to
write
and
whether
they
really
need
this
hierarchy.
I,
don't
think
of
the
instructions
read
yeah
cuz
I
worry
about
it.
I
know
like
I
know
like
in
the
know
like
CCI
does
something
like
this
and
we
end
up.
J
We
end
up
and
down
and
native,
like
spending
a
lot
of
time
like
yeah
with
these,
but
you
know
I,
don't
know
you
know
in
this
case.
If
the
goal
is
always
like:
dump
out
texts
and
stuff
and
doing
a
bunch
of
I/o
and
whatnot
where
you're
debugging
it
depends.
You
know
if
we,
if
it
is
the
if
the
throughput
here
is
like
really
important
or
not,
but
certainly
something
that
I
would
just
like
to
make
sure
that
we're
thinking
about
so.
I
J
Impossible
to
represent
it
in
various
ways
like
I'm
sure
some
of
the
things
are
are
like
properties
of
instructions
which
you
can
just
have
a
table
on
the
side
and
say,
like
you
know,
index
into
it
by
the
opcode.
You
can
get
all
some
of
those
properties
and
then
some
of
them
up
different
different
values
and
subsidies,
no
part
of
them.
It.
C
I
F
Reason
why
we
went
this
current
personal
so
that
it's
easier
for
the
consumers
to
see
what
they
are
because
I
mean
another
approach
we
consider
it
was
having
just
one
file
instructional
class
I've.
Had
you
know
couple
of
friends
single
around
all
of
the
operands
and
must
be
the
colors
from
Melissa
say,
switch
on
the
type
code
and
see
what
kind
of
a
friend
I
want
to
get
who
we
wanted
to
be
a
little
more.
Do
we
have
like
two.
H
H
B
J
H
Like
many
of
these
collections
are
exposed
as
I
in
the
middle
of
something
right
switches.
Well,
when
you
still
it,
they
are
not
common,
but
every
time
you
call
a
numerator
getenumerator,
you
have
a
location
and
this
and
that
so
that
that
doesn't
look
to
me
like
a
low-level
API,
for
you
know
kind
of
advanced
scenarios.
Yet
car
scenario
is
an
advanced
scenario.
It's
kind
of,
like
probably.
J
Not
that
hard
to
insert
a
level
between
that's
just
a
forward
only
kind
of
like
you
know,
cursor
over
the
bite
that
says.
Okay.
Currently,
you
know
you
have
this
off
code
and
you
have
these
and
you
can
do
it
without
allocating,
and
then
you
can
also
have
this
I
mean
there's
nothing
stopping
as
the
fact
that
lower
thing
you
might
just
put
it
right
into
systems,
are
reflection
on
metadata,
they're,
probably
pretty
small
and
be
useful
versus
the
bytes.
That
will
give
you
know.
H
Give
you
know
I,
don't
mind
higher
level.
Libraries
like
this,
but
I
think
like
they
should
build
on,
like
I,
think
we've
done
pretty
good
job
with
the
metadata
reader,
which
is
very
low
level
library,
not
allocating
super
efficient
and
simple.
Well,
simple
concept:
wise
simple!
Well,
not
very
convenient
to
use
you
kind
of
convenience
api's,
so.
J
H
You
see,
like
I,
didn't
mean
like
just
a
reader
that
basically
gives
you
up
code
that
we
met
one
argument
too
because
dead
like
yes,
you
know
it's
very
low
level
and
none
are
allocating.
But
then
you
you
have
things
like.
Is
it
a
branch
instruction?
Well,
you
can
still
have
a
helper
method
for
the
low
level.
Readers
basically
say.
Is
it
a
branch
instruction?
Is
you
know,
so
it's
not
just
a
role
either
of
bites
and
kind
of
you
know
it's
so.
D
G
C
B
J
B
It's
more
generic
to
the
stringbuilder.
The
other
thing
I
would
do
is
I
would
probably
not
have
that
and
instead
have
some
sort
of
settings
object
or
whatever,
because
chances
are.
We
want
to
add
one
more
flag,
won't
look
like
one
more
flag,
one
more
flag
and
then
it's
somebody
just
went
out
of
methods
and
then
I
would
mirror
that
with
the
other
things
here,
because
on
these
guys,
you
just
basically
have
was
it
a
dump,
the
if
it
turns
you
I,
they
see
that
yeah
exactly
so
you
we
have
that.
B
That
returns,
the
string
yeah,
I
think
for
something
where
you
up
with
something
you
should
never
have
that
you
should
always
take
the
input
in
and
then
write
to
that,
because
otherwise
you
have
these
intermediate
strings,
that
you
basically
create
and
then
just
take
them
and
write
it
so
far
and
dump
is
just
for.
Like
diagnostics,
if
we
know
that's
the
actual
scenario
you
want
to
get
basically
I'll
does
wallet.
This
is
sometimes
output,
eventually,
so
republished
call
it
right
or
right
to
or
something
the.
E
B
A
General
question
it
seems
like
in
general
this
layer,
it
sits
on
top
of
metadata
reader,
but
it
is
treated
as
an
implementation
detail
like
there's
no
way
to
go
from
a
method,
definition
to
a
method
to
have
methods
back
handle
if,
for
instance,
and
that
seemed
fine
and
it's
kind
of
came
until
I
saw
the
token
parameter
like
one
like.
If
this
is
meant
to
be
an
abstraction
that
hides
the
reflection
metadata
layer,
then
should
token
be
there,
and
if
token
is
there,
should
we
not
use
into
the
handle,
which
is
the
right?
A
J
J
Have
all
the
entity
handles
at
seven
that
was
reaction?
Okay,
that
was
buddy
I,
think
we
could
suppose
either
one.
There
are
sort
of
arguments
either
way,
because
there
are
some
things.
There
are
some
things
that
the
metadata
reader,
so
it
has
two
names
faces.
This
is
my
reflection
on
metadata.
This
is
our
reflection
on
metadata
doc.
Peck
about
30
35
at
the
metadata
level
are
actually
some
things
that
it
that
it
actually
as
low
level
as
it
is.
It
actually
does
kind
of
smooth
over
some
things
that
are
very
specific
to
the
format.
J
Now,
if
your
purpose
is
to
dump
IL,
sometimes
you
do
want
to
drop
to
that
level.
So
token
is
something
that
I
can
handle
is
technically
a
slightly
more
opaque
than
in
the
token.
So,
if
you
want
this
to
be,
you
know,
sort
of
a
library
that
you
read
the
book
and
then
you
you
know
you
might
want
to
use
tokens
may
want
to
use
handles.
I
will
add
that
if
you
have
scenarios
for
going
from
one
to
the
other,
we
support
that.
A
J
A
B
It's
completely
sensible
to
say
that
you
know
you
would
get.
Let's
say
one
of
those
objects,
essentially
either
from
the
MTV
they're,
similar
to
how
you
throw
you
do
other
stuff,
and
then
you
just
get
a
depending
on
the
haul.
This
library
interact
I
think
if
you
are
expecting
any
way
through
the
translation
to
get
meaningful
text
output
I
would
not
make
the
consumer
jump
through
hoops
to
get
there
like.
B
B
E
The
time
this
object
is
where
I
used,
so
the
assembly
is
created
about
with
all
that
some
assembly
constructor
that
just
get
a
I'm
assembly
breath
object,
that
is
up
from
the
metadata
reader,
a
namespace
and
all
of
the
values
in
our
dust
mask,
and
we
are
get
lazy,
I
see.
So
they
are
all
lazy,
remembers.
J
An
undated
unless
you
copy
it
always
to
like
manage
bikes
on
the
heat
than
you.
So
you
know
this
place
a
better
day
to
read
replica
suppose
the
P
reader,
which
is
the
guy
that
basically
has
the
abilities
of
like
mapping
files
from
disk
the
metadata
reader
just
takes
a
pointer
to
meditate,
but
you
need
you
need
to
keep
the
P
reader
live
to
like
you
need
to
keep
them.
There's
this
memory
things.
If
I
give
you
a
stream
for
example,
then
you
just
create
a
period
or
so
this
would
need
to
become
disposable,
which.
J
B
F
J
E
J
J
Made
a
PT
reader
from
from
the
from
Keith
image,
which
is
either
the
stream
file.
Okay,
the
fee
is
the
bigger
thing.
Whole,
it's
the
whole
file
met.
It
is
a
section
inside
that
final
metadata
reader
class
only
knows
about
the
metadata
section,
but
inside
the
metadata
section
there
are,
there
are
references
to
the
il
via
is
these
are
VA's
that
you
have
to
go
back
to
the
p.m.
and
just
say:
okay,
well,
I
want
these
bites
or
thy.
Also,
you
need
the
larger
image
section,
get
the
instructions,
and
I
think
you.
J
D
J
B
A
J
A
Fact
that
the
metadata
readers
use
is
the
relish
the
moment
you
ask
the
moment,
I
hand
to
the
meditator
reader
and
you
give
me
back
objects
and
I
can't
go
back
down.
Then,
if
I
can't
jump
between
those
layers,
don't
you
feel
frustrating
because,
like
oh
I'm,
giving
you
a
better
day
to
reader,
give
me
a
bigger
view
on
it.
You
won't,
let
me
go
back
down
right.
J
A
D
C
J
D
C
D
B
I
think
I
think
there's
enough
feedback
for
because
I
mean
it.
I
don't
think
it's
done
enough
to
actually
do
a
an
exhausting
review,
but
I
mean
thing
we
have
enough
feedback
collected
to
actually
give
you
some
things
to
think
about,
and
then
I
think
you
need
to
make
a
decision
on
like
whether
it
hides
them
on
the
line
metadata
radio,
whether
it
exposes
the
first
citizen
there's
lifetime
issues
in
the
general
design
of
the.
How
do
you
expose
the
visitation
versus
the?
Actually?
B
J
Question
so
this
is
just
because
it's
not
finished
that
there's
no
method,
ref
and
type
ref
or
is
it
because
they're
both
represented
is
the
same
type
I
see
only
like
pile,
doesn't
met
the
definition
and
like
I,
don't
see
method.
Remember
me,
for
example:
well
there's
this
just
because
this
is
a
in
progress
or
not
a
design
to
represent
them
both
together.
Well.
J
C
J
You
this
is
the
thing,
so
you
have
assembly,
feel
vocal
right
by
lake
and
then
your
method
definition.
So
it's
method,
better
definition,
isn't
it
oh
I
see.
Otherwise
you
would
just
literally
have
a
ref.
You
just
have
some
string
inside
jail
or
something
you
never
actually
have
not
an
object.
India
is
all.
C
E
J
C
C
B
C
B
C
B
It
was
one
question
on
the
audience
which
is
which
is
the
school
that
I'm
using
and
it's
an
insurance
will
they
be
boat
over
the
years,
which
is
a
fortune
of
public.
We
may
make
it
public
or
we
may
not
make
public.
I
dunno
it
so
anyway.
So
the
question
for
this
particular
thing
is:
stick
is
everyone.
You
know
view
of
what
the
project
is.
B
It
is,
I
just
did
this
one
here.
So
basically
that's
what
I
said
earlier.
So
if
you
do
this
and
this
and
you
see
the
folders
between
systems
or
parameters
and
system.drawing,
and
I
basically
just
removed
types
that
we
added
in
pipes
remove
all
the
types
of
e-edit
should
be
empty,
so
remove
types.
If
we
ignore
that,
then
that's
the
shape
and
you
can
see
full
members
being
added
or
removed.
So
it's
virtually
the
same
as
system.drawing.
D
C
B
C
D
H
I
I
mean
involved
in
many
of
these
and
now
I'm,
asking
of
like
doing
it,
the
last
it
and
be
hundred
percent
compatible
or
or
we
can
do
some
tweaks,
and
if
the
answer
is
yes,
we're
gonna,
provide
forwarders
and
make
it
really
to
be
a
portable
library
that
yet
we
need
to
be
hundred
percent
compatible.
It
has
value
yeah.
K
K
It's
just
not
sufficient,
like
the
existing
color
does
not
have
a
lot
of
vector
operations
on
it.
It's
being
treated
as
a
I
mean
the
existing
color
is
not
treated
as
a
vector
like
we
don't
have
scaling
for
interpolating,
or
there
were
some
discussions
about
adding
gamma
is
senior
and
all
that
stuff.
So
we
need
to
like
come
up
with
concrete
scenarios
first
for
color
and
then
see
where
our
API
is
not
matching
that
and
add
new
features.
Oh.
I
C
I
B
I
F
B
C
C
B
C
B
Change
I
mean
technically
you
you
have
this
other
limitation.
That
I
mean,
if
you
add
all
scenarios
for
supporting
right,
because
you
cannot
just
recon
politician
code.
You
can
buy
existing
code.
I
said
that
the
binaries
work
as
they
are
right,
so
the
whole
scenario
source
compact.
So
in
that
sense,
if
they
say
it's
only
source
breaking
it's
like
yeah,
but
it's
a
scenario
now
I'll.
It
being
said
like
how
many
people
actually
call
these
things
with
names
arguments.
A
C
B
But
is
there
any
other
conservative
the
types
themselves,
because
basically
we
had
some
discussion
before
about
1.8,
f,
rectangle,
rectangle,
a
half
and
I
think
we
concluded
ebony
both
types
anyway
and
renaming
types
will
be
breaking
so
that
would
defeat
the
purpose.
But
you
know,
besides
aesthetics
I,
don't
have
a
problem,
so
the.
H
J
B
That
I
mean
we
did
it
with
other
AP
is
like
directory
API
a
share
basis,
starting
with
immutable,
and
we
got
very
strong.
Tpa
people
really
didn't
want
them
to
be
visible.
Everybody
said
this
is
so
annoying
if
I
actually
have
to
initialize
them
instructors,
only
I'm
so
used
to
just
assign
the
videos,
and
they
think
the
feedback
was
very,
very
strong
one.
H
B
H
B
Its
more
common
for
locals
right
because
you
deal
with
let's
say
you,
you
get
the
click
to
hit
segment
forms
and
you
get
the
bounding
rector
of
something,
and
you
just
want
to
basically
offset
the
rectangle
tool
to
a
location.
It's
very
easy!
If
you
just
get
direct,
you
can
say
wreck
thought
what
is
the
thing
called:
yeah,
origin
or
top
and
just
assign
it
directly
right.
It's
just
so
much
more
clear
what
the
code
does
as
opposed
to
you
rectangle
and
then
passing
in
the
old
pages
you
kind
of
have
to
like
all.
B
G
H
B
B
G
C
G
H
Anyway,
I
didn't
find
for
many
reasons.
I
kind
of
the
only
thing
that
I
was
saying
is
for
a
lot
of
api's
beautiful.
I
stopped
only
makes
sense.
I
movie
chronicles
the
way
that
I
use
several
times,
but
now
I
think
hope
that
they
will
get
deficiency,
but
they
don't
because
the
other
8
guys
that
use
those
make
copies
anyway.
So
but
anyway,.