Joseph Musser

@mikkelbu You're right. In fact, it's already doing this in 2.8.2. [sharplab.io](https://sharplab.io/#v2:EYLgHgbALANALiATgVwHYB8ACAGABJgRgG4BYAKHMwGZ8CJ8AmWgdnIG9zcv8bD7MotABwAKAJSduHMt1m4AygEMAtgFMAggGcRVMaRncAvpK4metfoKVqtIgPbAAVqoDGcXKrAAHV3FUATCQMuaTluQgBOEQAiRWi9M2Ng3DNqC3wrFQ1NAB4AFQA+ETyPb18AsVwAdwALVURVXBKQRjNQsNoo6OB4/VkkpKA==) Since IIRC they're taking the same approach with bestest betterness as they did with better betterness, it won't...

I've been leaving LastGenOutput and other boilerplate there for the reason that the VS resx designer will reinsert it anyway on each save, and I don't want to have to...

I added a [comment in the issue](https://github.com/nunit/nunit/issues/4744#issuecomment-2312744124) about an alternative to events for supporting async setup work being attached to these hooks.

@OsirisTerje asked me to look at this with an eye to, what if you want to do something async during these hooks without NUnit proceeding until your async work is...

> And yes, we struggle for sequentiell execution of the hooks. But that can be ensured on the user side. Yes, this is what I was going to say. If...

> So for me, it only makes sense to add both versions if we would also provide a possibility to control the order of execution of different IApplyToContext assembly attributes....

I should add, NUnit could decide to wait for each async handler to complete before invoking the next. I'm not sure I have an opinion on that. That makes async...

> But I can't say that the `new object[] {"a", 1}` is very readable. In C# 12, it should be possible to write `["a", 1]` instead.

Ah, and `params object[][]` is not a valid signature to add for use in attribute syntax. Gotcha. This is a scenario we hope to make smoother when we get to...

Would it help those who come after us to say something explicit, so that people don't have to try to tease apart whether or not things were blocked by design...