Antony Male
Antony Male
Can you use `Response.StringContent`? The fact that `Response.GetContent()` uses the deserializer is an oversight, but I'm not sure whether I can change it safely at this point.
I think this is probably a candidate for 2.0 -- I want to rethink handling of strings there entirely.
Sure, I'll look into it. I'll have to see if there are any implications or compatibility-breaking changes for other users: I know some libraries publish separate NuGet packages for signed...
Looks like the issue quite a bit more complex than I'd anticipated: - Strong naming an assembly messes with binding redirects in NuGet. The workaround seems to be to freeze...
The current status is that I've had 2 requests for strong naming (including yours), 1 request not to strong name, and a workaround proposed. If you have experience with strong...
In fairness, that article does say > ✔️ CONSIDER strong naming your library's assemblies. And it also says: > ❌ DO NOT publish strong-named and non-strong-named versions of your library....
Same as last time: > The 4 points in my original question are still awaiting answers. If you have any input on those please provide it!
It's not supported because I didn't want to start going down the rabbit hole of writing a custom serializer! Those things get complex fast: I've done it before. That said,...
I guess whatever happens to request bodies should also happen to query maps.
Todo list: 1. Write code to serialise an object to a set of query params. 2. Add a new attribute allowing a name to be given to a property in...