General Discussion

netstandard support

Started by kentcb on 11,823 views

Hi,

I just installed a package (Humanizer) and found that NCrunch cannot build my project:

DeviceDetailsViewModel.cs (9, 11): The type or namespace name 'Humanizer' could not be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?)


Looking into it, I found it's because Humanizer has moved to netstandard, as are a lot of other packages. If I install the previous version of Humanizer (2.0.1) which does not target netstandard, everything works as expected.

Is netstandard support something that is in the pipeline?

Thanks,
Kent

Edited

I'm running into the exact same thing as well on VS2015 and NCrunch 3.3.0.6.

I downgraded Humanizer to 2.0.1 on all projects and it still says "The type or namespace name 'Humanizer' could not be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?)"
On a project referencing Entity Framework 6.1.3 it says "The type or namespace name 'Entity' does not exist in the namespace 'System.Data' (are you missing an assembly reference?)"
On a test project it says "The type or namespace name 'NUnit' could not be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?)"

Any idea what's going on?

I'm using NuGet v3 (project.json) in all projects and they are all traditional net452 csprojs.

Edited

Hi,

At the moment there is a known problem in v3.3 where for some reason, references that are declared via project.json don't seem to be correctly detected by NCrunch. This seems to be a new problem (v3.2 is OK).

I hope to get a fix out for this soon. Meanwhile, I recommend you declare your references in your project XML or stick with v3.2 until a fix is available.
3.2 is fine. If I might ask for a tiny feature... some applications give you an option to "ignore this version" so that you don't have to click through upgrade prompts every time you open them.
There is a way to switch it off :)

The 'Check for updates' global config setting.

I know it's not the same as what you're asking for, but I thought I'd check to make sure you knew about it.
Thanks. My preference to know about shiny new bits will likely override. :')

Post a reply

Log in to reply.