Steven Weerdenburg

Thanks for your interest @Kooddammn . I'm sorry, but this issue has already been started and has a PR submitted for it. My apologies that we didn't update the issue...

Thanks for the review @manfred-brands I'll go back and check a few things. Many of the changes here are made to support incremental, non-breaking changes rather than a "big-bang" rewrite...

@manfred-brands @OsirisTerje We made the decision in https://github.com/nunit/nunit/pull/4848 to change the return type under the controls that we do not modify the original return type in order to mitigate binary...

@manfred-brands you may be getting ahead of me here. My intent with the PR is much smaller, primarily to just add a new `EqualsConstraint : Constraint` and not touch the...

It feels like there's a few different ideas here. I'm going to close this PR for now but keep the branch so that we can continue discussing the approach in...

Quite right! And I should clarify that the EOL date I mentioned above was Microsoft's, meaning NUnit's would be around May 2025. In either event, a transition process could be...

Having typed that up, I see it would be odd if implemented exactly as written as we'd be distributing a version of the framework under a TFM that we say...

@snuup You mentioned you encountered these on version 4.3.0. We've released a few bug fixes since then. Do you also see it on version 4.3.2?

Ok thanks for confirming @manfred-brands

Nice research @manfred-brands I had been wondering if we should close this then as it seems a language issue rather than a framework one. Any objections from you or @OsirisTerje...