policy.2012.01.Telerik.OpenAccess.35.Extensions.dll vs 40

EDIT: I meant: Telerik.OpenAccess.35.Extensions.dll

I see that the wizard auto sets a reference to Telerik.OpenAccess.35.Extensions.dll. But, I also see that there's a file called, "Telerik.OpenAccess.40.Extensions.dll".

Is there a scenario under which I should be using the 40 reference?

Hello Keith,

 The 40 assembly actually contains code that is specific to the .NET 4.0 framework. However it does not contain the code and functionality that is packed in the 3.5 assembly (such as LINQ). You should include the 40 binaries only if you are interested in using the OpenAccessLinqDataSource or the providers for DynamicData.

I hope this is helpful. 

Greetings,
Serge
the Telerik team

I'm still confused.

40 does NOT support Linq?  But, I should use 40 if I want support for "OpenAccessLinqDataSource or the providers for DynamicData"?

If 40 doesn't support Linkq, what's this: OpenAccessLinqDataSource?

And, what id DynamicData? What do I lose out on if I use 35 instead of 40?

Hello Keith,

 Sorry for not explaining myself clearly. What I meant was that these assemblies are not interchangeable and contain different features. You can still use the 3.5 binary in 4.0 applications, and you should because in it is our LINQ implementation (that is the same for 4.0 and 3.5). 

The OpenAccessLinqDataSource is a web component for ASP.NET Web Forms that is used for easily binding data. And DynamicData is a web framework that is used for quickly setting up scaffolding for basic CRUD operation on entities. 

You needn't choose between one of the two binaries, just reference them both. I completely agree that the naming here is misleading and this is something we will certainly fix in the future. 

I hope this helps. 

Greetings,
Serge
the Telerik team

OH! So, 40 is NOT a later version of 35?? Yeah, that IS a pretty confusing naming convention.

Thanks so much for clarifying that, surge.