IXamlType.FullName Inconsistency

[workgroupengineering]

IXamlType.FullName Inconsistency

[adamsitnik]

cecil should probably switch to TNP for net9-and-above

The new TypeName API is part of System.Reflection.Metadata package, which supports older monikers too:

Looks like it's an expected behavior for Type.FullName to return assembly qualified names for generics

Yes, but only for the generic arguments.

> typeof(List<int>).FullName
"System.Collections.Generic.List`1[[System.Int32, System.Private.CoreLib, Version=9.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=7cec85d7bea7798e]]"
> typeof(List<int>).AssemblyQualifiedName
"System.Collections.Generic.List`1[[System.Int32, System.Private.CoreLib, Version=9.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=7cec85d7bea7798e]], System.Private.CoreLib, Version=9.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=7cec85d7bea7798e"

[maxkatz6]

Likely, Cecil one is expected.

Sre is a mix of Type.AssemblyQualifiedName (for generics) and FullName for the main type name itself.

Also, anything that compatible with .NET TypeNameParser is a bonus:
dotnet/runtime#97566

[maxkatz6]

Looks like it's an expected behavior for Type.FullName to return assembly qualified names for generics. For some reason.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.type.assemblyqualifiedname?view=net-8.0

[maxkatz6]

For your tests, you might want to use these extensions probably:

XamlX/src/XamlX/TypeSystem/TypeSystem.cs

Lines 341 to 351 in 941dafc

	public static string GetFqn(this IXamlType type) => $"{type.Assembly?.Name}:{type.Namespace}.{type.Name}";
	public static string GetFullName(this IXamlType type)
	{
	var name = type.Name;
	if (type.Namespace != null)
	name = type.Namespace + "." + name;
	if (type.Assembly != null)
	name += "," + type.Assembly.Name;
	return name;
	}

Unless our GetFullName extension is missing generics (which it might do).

[workgroupengineering]

What do you think if I normalized the Sre FullName like in Cecil instead of using an extension method?

[maxkatz6]

I don't know if it will break anything. It would require double checking any FullName usage.
Also, it's still not clear which variant is more standard.

[kasperk81]

Also, it's still not clear which variant is more standard.

there is no spec: dotnet/runtime#97566 (comment)

in the future, more systems are likely to depend on TypeNameParser's behavior. @adamsitnik may able to clarify some confusion. cecil should probably switch to TNP for net9-and-above