dodexahedron

> The idea is _mostly_ captured by the content of the pitch, but we think there are a couple more details to figure out, since different modes support different sets...

NumericUpDown controls are nice to have for sure! I have some initial thoughts but I'll come back to this later after I've thought about them a bit. But I'll put...

Going to make comments expanding on my earlier musing as separate posts for clarity... First, expanding on the type-agnostic thing... This is something that we can do thanks to work...

For presentation, I don't know if there's really much more to say than I already did, but here are more words anyway: As I'm sure everyone is already perfectly aware,...

Actually, I do have another idea for that, but it can be done with any of those options: Perform validation separately from actually updating the underlying T value. For example,...

And for the third part of my initial comment: That was just a thought based on how similar controls are composed in some other UI frameworks, but we can of...

One thing I _would_ like to suggest and request, though, is that any work to add _new_ view types like this be held off for now. The event refactor gets...

Just going through some old items in my queue... > Once @dodexahedron is ready with the event refactor we can work on enhancing this and making it part of the...

I would tend to agree that bars should be drawn inside, beginning from the inside of where Margin begins, and should not be included in width or height calculations. If...

> Please, when using `AssertDriverContentsWithFrameAre` on unit tests use the @"", otherwise R# will break it. I think I see what might have happened for you. It looks like trailing...