Notice (2018-05-24): bugzilla.xamarin.com is now in
Please join us on
Visual Studio Developer Community and in the
Mono organizations on
GitHub to continue tracking issues. Bugzilla will remain
available for reference in read-only mode. We will continue to work
on open Bugzilla bugs, copy them to the new locations
as needed for follow-up, and add the new items under Related
Our sincere thanks to everyone who has contributed on this bug
tracker over the years. Thanks also for your understanding as we
make these adjustments and improvements for the future.
Please create a new report on
Developer Community or GitHub with
your current version information, steps to reproduce, and relevant error
messages or log files if you are hitting an issue that looks similar to
this resolved bug and you do not yet see a matching new report.
The actual method signature for the ObtainStyledAttributes method is (IAttributeSet set, int attrs, int defStyleAttr, int defStyleRes)
The official Android documentation and Xamarin intellisense shows it as (IAttributeSet set, int attrs, int defStyleAttr, int defStyleRes) which is mistaken
The compiler even properly detected that attrs is an 'int' not an 'int' and causes the build to fail. It is simply the documentation is wrong.
I have checked this issue and observed that the actual method signature for the ObtainStyledAttributes method is (IAttributeSet set, int attrs, int defStyleAttr, int defStyleRes) as mentioned in the official android document ("http://developer.android.com/reference/android/content/res/Resources.Theme.html#obtainStyledAttributes(android.util.AttributeSet, int, int, int)") and if I try to change it from integer array to integer it gives compile time error.
As per my understanding it is expected behavior. Please let me know if I am missing anything.
Xamarin Studio 4.2.3 (build 60)
Xamarin.Android : 4.12.2 (Business Edition)
Release ID: 402030060
Build date: 2014-03-05 16:53:54Z
Xamarin addins: f8a9589b57c2bfab2ccd73c880e7ad81e3ecf044
marking as INVALID (could be NORESPONSE either, but comment #1 seems to apply here).