Joseph Musser

@carllaw6885 It's been a while and that's alright. I'm going to mark this as up for grabs. If you're still working on it, let us know and we can assign...

I like this concept. I like it even more when the message is included, because I've been bitten by tests only checking paramName and not realizing the test only passed...

Good point. It makes sense to verify the message of all the ArgumentExceptions except for ArgumentNullException, pretty much, but that's one message you really don't want to be specifying in...

@jeffkl I'll certainly take you up on your generous offer if you still have the desire after three years :D I'll remove `Up For Grabs` and assign you if you'd...

Can you add the string argument before the default parameters? If I remember right, `string? customMessage = null` should always be the last parameter no matter what; otherwise, reading the...

We could also consider making this composable, e.g. `.ShouldThrow().ShouldHave("argName", "Optional message");`. The downside would be discoverability and not having as much of a strong suggestion that you should verify the...

I like this idea. If you run the test suite twice, the tests will first fail then succeed, so that could be weird. But source control should show you all...

A question that remains for me is whether it's idiomatic in snapshot testing to simply turn on a setting temporarily and run the tests to regenerate all files rather than...

Okay, so we'll have to file an issue at https://github.com/VerifyTests/DiffEngine and possibly contribute a fix if we want to implement this new option. @Piedone @SimonCropp What do both of you...

And `sbyte`? :D