-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 119
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
Target .net standard 2.0? #182
Comments
Hi. From preliminary experiments - it might be possible. I'm not sure how to deal with |
There are two major problems when referencing .NET Standard - version-dependent references for I have made some minor changes to allow compilation against .NET Standard 2.1 for If that's OK with you, change |
Thanks for your quick response. I will have to live with that my library also has to target a specific .NET version instead of .netstandard. |
Support for .NET Standard is great, and while .NET 2.1 requires .NET 5+, I wish it would support .NET 2.0 so that it is better compatible with the .NET Framework |
For .NET Framework there is original Report Viewer. |
Sure, but not when you want to migrate from .NET Framework to .NET. Then, .NET Standard 2.0 is the only bridge between the two, where assemblies targeting .NET Standard 2.0 can be referenced from both. |
Fair enough. The problem is .NET Standard 2.0 is missing some APIs from Consider multi-targeting your assembly/package and compile it against .NET Framework and .NET from same codebase, but referencing |
I went a different way - isolated the report rendering into a special web api application that renders the report and returns a byte array - so other code now has no direct references to the code that uses this library. |
Hello,
this library now targets the specific .NET versions such as .NET 5, 6, 7, 8.
If we want to reference it in a class library project, we will have to target .NET 8 as well, but for class libraries, .net standard is the recommended target.
Can your library target .net standard instead of the specific .NET versions?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: