What changed in Dot Net 3.5 SP1?
There are a few interesting blogs from people about the changes in 3.5 SP1.
Here are a few stats:
Summary:
# Assemblies 112
# Namespaces 919 to 935 (+16 +1.7%)
# Types 39 988 to 40 513 (+525 +1.3%)
# Methods 387 421 to 386 790 (-631 -0.2%)
# Fields 241 567 to 246 795 (+5 228 +2.2%)
# IL instructions 8 598 933 to 8 620 940 (+22 007 +0.3%)
# Namespaces 919 to 935 (+16 +1.7%)
# Types 39 988 to 40 513 (+525 +1.3%)
# Methods 387 421 to 386 790 (-631 -0.2%)
# Fields 241 567 to 246 795 (+5 228 +2.2%)
# IL instructions 8 598 933 to 8 620 940 (+22 007 +0.3%)
That is a SP! Why didn't they call it 3.6? There are SO many changes in the SP1 that I find it hard to believe it is not called 3.6, and Visual Studio 2008 should have an R2 added to it. The Entity Framework and other ado changes are huge. This level us changes just should not happen in a Service Pack in my opinion. 5000 new fields being added to an API sounds like a NEW API.
Brad Abrams Blog with videos and explantion text.
Similar Posts
- Entity Framework Vote of No Confidence
- SQL Server 2008 (Katmai) Information
- Visual Studio 2008 SP1 is live
Comments
Yaakov Ellis on on 8.19.2008 at 3:39 AM
You are right - it should have a new version number. However, I think that people are so confused over the differences between 2.0 -> 3.0 -> 3.5 that MS may be trying to avoid moving the actual version number for as long as possible.
Brian Boatright on on 8.19.2008 at 9:40 AM
Also I think releasing it as a service pack gives it the added feeling of having only fixed bugs in the previous release, not introducing new ones.
Jason Short on on 8.24.2008 at 10:18 AM
You are right about confusion over the numbering already. But I think that is more reason to just roll all these changes with the previous ones into a 4.0 and reset their silly numbering. But it won't happen.