Feat: Why not using BAML as resource, instead of decompiling improper XAML's?

[Blamara]

I am not very familiar with xaml-s, I do them only when I have to.
So no, I am not an expert for xamls.
That been said

I've noticed a lot of errors related to {StaticResource ...} block been omitted on very different places.
Also problem with correct class names, controls used in style definitions.
And that whole IDE is so stupid to recognize correct errors in xamls, which makes correcting xamls very tedious work (on which I gave up btw).
Spent whole afternoon fixing those errors, and then realized something:
We can remove incorrect XAML, put original BAML in resource file, and everything will compile correctly. YES ;)

As long as we do not need UI (and in most cases we don't - debuging 3rd party sw) this is OK. if we need UI we will have to decompile BAML back to XAML, remove BAML resource, and add XAML to code. And of course maybe fix only this one XAML code.

This would make a World easier using this Decompiler. I guess decompiling process much easier as there would be nothing to decompile. Only add BAML files as resource content to project files.

So why not making BAML or XAML output as Decompiler Option?

Also I am for more decompiler behavioral options. 
Noticed more then several times that code is rearranged to Teleriks JustDecompiler liking. To my dislike. Or in some cases producing errors in code, like in case of instancing new structures with in lined member size referencing same instance that has not been created yet.

Having this behavioral options would help a lot. Not to mention saving debugging time a lot, since we would be able to discover bugs in 3rd party software much easier/faster.

Thanks

[Alexander]

Hello Blamara,

Thank you for your feature request.

You can add it in our UserVoice system. By doing this, you will give the opportunity to other people to vote for your idea, which will affect its priority on our backlog.


Regards,
Alexander
Telerik