You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
With the new TFMs in .NET 5 and removal of winmd support, we need to clarify the story for light-up scenarios and how we advise both library and app developers to write adaptive code. The scenarios involve C# libraries and apps in .NET 5+ that want to call Windows SDK projection APIs (WinRT APIs).
We are proposing adding an analyzer for ApiInformation checks to protect light-up code.
We can use this deliverable-sized issue to track light-up support work.
.NET 5 library authors want to light-up with WinRT APIs, but this imposes a TFM requirement on customers (referencing applications)
Improve integration of ApiInformation checks with projected SupportedOSPlatform attributes from C#/WinRT, and improve guidance on using ApiInformation checks
Project SupportedOSPlatform attributes downlevel, e.g. Windows 8
Clarify combinations of the TFM, SupportedOSPlatformVersion, TPV/TPMV
Integration with Windows App SDK APIs
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Background
With the new TFMs in .NET 5 and removal of winmd support, we need to clarify the story for light-up scenarios and how we advise both library and app developers to write adaptive code. The scenarios involve C# libraries and apps in .NET 5+ that want to call Windows SDK projection APIs (WinRT APIs).
We are proposing adding an analyzer for ApiInformation checks to protect light-up code.
We can use this deliverable-sized issue to track light-up support work.
Open Questions
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: