I\'ve got a WCF service, in which there are operations which accept a non-generic base class as parameter.
I am building a set of WCF services that share common data contracts (or entities if you prefer). These are simple data transfer objects that are decorated with DataContract and DataMember attributes.
I have a WCF service method that expects an object and then retrieves its properties using reflection.
Given the fact that I have a fully dynamic object model, that is, I have no concrete classes defined anywhere in code, but I still want to be able to create WCF DataContracts for them so I can use the
I have a base class like the following: [Serializable] public class SerializableDomainObject<T> { public SerializableDomainObject()
I have created a number of WCF Services, for arguments sake they are called Service1 and Service2. Both of the services return (at some point, possibly through a relationship inside an object) a Cust
We publish a class library that must remain compatible with .NET 2.0.However, we would also like to use this class library internally for WCF-based projects.
I have fo开发者_StackOverflow社区und that my WCF services work normally when the data types involved doesn\'t have the [DataContract], but the [Serializable] instead.
I need to pass som开发者_JAVA百科e container of objects to WCF call [DataContract] class Foo { // other fields omited
what is the difference between class without DataContract attributes: public class BankOperationResult
加载中,请稍侯......