Steven Weerdenburg
Steven Weerdenburg
It doesn't sound like there's much interest for this and my own opinion on it has changed a bit after my discussion with @CharliePoole above. I'd like to close it...
Hm. One caveat to this is that I think a pre-boxed value like `(object)1` will change behavior if passed into the constraint since TActual will be object instead of int....
I've had a chance to playaround with this a bit more in sharplab and it looks like `GetType()` can still be optimized. I think there's still value in this
PR #4004 may also fix this, though I'm not at a computer at the moment to verify
@quldude Sorry there's no timeline yet. Someone from the @nunit/framework-team will need to take a look at the PR and verify it behaves as intended. I've been looking through the...
Interesting, thanks @vpenades ! I've labeled this as an `idea` to see if there's general interest.
Hi @manfred-brands Just wanted to circle back to this. I've been waiting to get involved in this PR myself until I had a decent amount of time to sink into...
> Hi @stevenaw this is not a fix for the `TimeOutAttribute` on non-Framework runtimes. I'm now leaning to introduce a new `CancelAfterAttribute` instead for this to make it clear it...
> We cannot "fix" timeout attribute for .NET Core as there is no Thread.Abort to stop any runaway test. Personally, I don't like reporting an error and then let the...
If multiple is desired, then I think @manfred-brands fixed it in main via https://github.com/nunit/nunit/pull/3926 Should the relevant parts of that PR be backported to 3.13.x in order to close this?