<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Multi-file Assemblies: What and How</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/grantri/archive/2004/07/07/175745.aspx</link><description>I intentionally left out the 'why' because only you as developer on your own product can decide why a given programming feature should or shouldn't be used. First the easy part: What Multi-file assemblies are simply assemblies that consist of more than</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>re: Multi-file Assemblies: What and How</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/grantri/archive/2004/07/07/175745.aspx#182114</link><pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2004 21:52:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:182114</guid><dc:creator>Kevin Dente</dc:creator><description>Here's another potential use - a way to package unit tests so that they are part of the assembly (and can therefore call internal members), but can be removed from shipping code.</description></item><item><title>re: Multi-file Assemblies: What and How</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/grantri/archive/2004/07/07/175745.aspx#183171</link><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jul 2004 17:31:00 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:183171</guid><dc:creator>Grant</dc:creator><description>That's an interesting idea.  However I'm pretty sure that tools like PEVerify.exe and GacUtil.exe that verify the assembly contents would complain about the missing file, and possibly prevent you from installing your assembly into the GAC or use partial trust scenarios.</description></item><item><title>re: Multi-file Assemblies: What and How</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/grantri/archive/2004/07/07/175745.aspx#454401</link><pubDate>Mon, 22 Aug 2005 11:06:55 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:454401</guid><dc:creator>J.S.</dc:creator><description>In your post last year you mentioned why al.exe was not much better than cse.exe.  Are you now saying that cse.exe is better in situations where one needs multi-language assemblies, incremental downloads, or linked resources?  Thanks!</description></item><item><title>re: Multi-file Assemblies: What and How</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/grantri/archive/2004/07/07/175745.aspx#467004</link><pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2005 07:05:11 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:467004</guid><dc:creator>grantri</dc:creator><description>My point of the previous post was that csc.exe can do most of what al.exe is used for, and generally produce fewer files that need to be shipped.</description></item><item><title>DevTopics</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/grantri/archive/2004/07/07/175745.aspx#3008445</link><pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 17:16:01 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:3008445</guid><dc:creator>DevTopics</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;PingBack from &lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://www.devtopics.com/net-assembly-faq-part-1/"&gt;http://www.devtopics.com/net-assembly-faq-part-1/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item></channel></rss>