Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 172789
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 11, 20262026-05-11T13:13:41+00:00 2026-05-11T13:13:41+00:00

.NET 2.0 introduced VTS (Version Tolerant Serialization, http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms229752(VS.80).aspx ) A simple test project reveals

  • 0

.NET 2.0 introduced VTS (Version Tolerant Serialization, http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms229752(VS.80).aspx )

A simple test project reveals that the default behavior in 2.0 is to not throw a serialization exception if a field is added to a class, then an attempt is made to deserialize an instance of that class from a binary serialization of a class instance that didn’t have the new field.

The default behavior in 1.1 is to throw a serialization exception if a field present in the class is missing in the binary serialized bits.

Besides breaking backwards compatibility (code relying on the exceptions being thrown doesn’t work anymore), there’s a bigger problem: there is no obvious way to emulate the 1.1 behaviour in 2.0.

How do I emulate the ‘throw exception on missing/extra fields’ 1.1 behavior in 2.0?

Many thanks, Miron

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. 2026-05-11T13:13:41+00:00Added an answer on May 11, 2026 at 1:13 pm

    Only fields that have the OptionalFieldAttribute attribute applied to them should ignore the missing information during deserialization. Simply removing that attribute should yield an exception, and result in the same behaviour as in .NET Framework 1.1.

    Update:

    The culprit must be the AssemblyFormat property of the BinaryFormatter class, which is FormatterAssemblyStyle.Full by default in 1.1, but which is FormatterAssemblyStyle.Simple by default in 2.0.

    In fact, setting this to FormatterAssemblyStyle.Simple in 1.1 will yield the same behaviour as in 2.0: no exception is thrown. At last in .NET 2.0 you have the OptionalFieldAttribute to be more finegrained.

    So set this property to FormatterAssemblyStyle.Full, and see what it does.

    See also here.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Oracle 11g version of ODP.Net introduces the provider model objects (session state provider, identity
.NET Framework: 2.0 Preferred Language: C# I am new to TDD (Test Driven Development).
.Net's implementation of HTTP is ... problematic. Beyond some issues in compliance with HTTP/1.0,
I heard once that .net introduced an already defined delegate with no parameter that
.NET 4 introduced Code Contracts as a new feature. I'd like to use CC,
C# 2 and VB.Net 8 introduced a new feature called iterators , which were
I was just thinking about it and since .Net has introduced properties is there
Does the HashSet collection introduced in .NET 3.5 preserve insertion order when iterated using
A useful convenience introduced in .NET 4 is Stream.CopyTo(Stream[, Int32]) which reads the content
I have seen the Tuple introduced in .Net 4 but I am not able

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.