ITaluone

Hi Is this ticket kind of "api-approved" and can be implemented? Or do we need something else here?

My proposed API changes are: ```diff GenericCollectionAssertions { + public FluentAssertions.AndConstraint ContainItemsOfType(string because = "", params object[] becauseArgs) { } + public FluentAssertions.AndWhichConstraint ContainSingleOfType(string because = "", params object[] becauseArgs)...

That's why I proposed this two new `Contain...` methods. What about something like: ```csharp action.Should().Throw().WhoseInnerExceptionChain.Should().HaveElementsOfExactType(); // or action.Should().Throw().WhoseInnerExceptionChain.Should().HaveElementsOfType(); // or action.Should().Throw().WhoseInnerExceptionChain.Should().HaveItemsOfType(); ``` Using `GenericCollectionAssertions` here makes the most sense IMHO.

Can you @dennisdoomen @jnyrup please clarify wether the way of finally asserting a generic collection is the right one. or should we concentrate on asserting only a `IEnumerable` here?

Hmm.. this have to be a bug then.. @whymatter

Hmm... but what if I want to exclude `Name` on every `Item`? IMHO this is what @Turnerj wants to acheive here..

How can this happen: https://github.com/fluentassertions/fluentassertions/blob/d53e8d996fcfb9141a89ebf8230115aebe5263fd/Src/FluentAssertions/Equivalency/Steps/DataSetEquivalencyStep.cs#L31-L34 If not should I remove this (also related to `DataColumEquivalencyStep` and `DataRowEquivalencyStep`)

I have tried very hard to reach this line of code: https://coveralls.io/builds/48537553/source?filename=Src%2FFluentAssertions%2FEventRaisingExtensions.cs#L138 but I can not set up a test to do this. Is it dead code?

Hi thanks for your reply. Not a real problem by now. Thanks anyway :)

Pong