Tanner Gooding

Will take a look. It's probably a bad interplay between the `function pointer` support that exists for .NET 5+ and the compatible handling that exists for .NET Standard

A couple such suggestions were: * Dotty (or Dottie) * Netty (or Nettie) * Dotty McDotface * The dot ness monster

A repro showing the following program: ```csharp using System.Runtime.Versioning; Console.WriteLine($"Environment.OSVersion: {Environment.OSVersion}"); Console.WriteLine("Checking OperatingSystem.IsWindowsVersionAtLeast(7, 0)"); if (OperatingSystem.IsWindowsVersionAtLeast(7, 0)) { CheckSucceeded(); } else { CheckFailed(); } [SupportedOSPlatform("Windows7.0")] static void CheckSucceeded() => Console.WriteLine("Check...

.NET 6 does still support Windows 7 as well, and is in support for at least another 12 months, it also has this issue. I think at the very least...

> Sure! How would you want to do that? @RossNordby. That's really up to you. We could setup something informal over Teams or Discord, we could just have an async...

@damian-666 > but ideally wouid be T with generalized SIMD like has gone nicely to Vector128 which is amazing progress I've looked at providing a `Vector2/3/4`, `Matrix4x4`, etc. We even...

@vpenades > does numeric.vectors have a specific place for discussion? I also use vectors extensively but don't want to steal discussion Depends on what the discussion is about. In general...

Same general feedback as given on the issue. I'm not particularly a fan of this, as its potentially lossy and brings in a new dependency. This really seems like something...

I'd tend to agree with Rick here, but additionally, I don't really want to unnecessarily bring in new dependencies, particularly not ones that could require me to expose my TFM...

I would think this falls into the category of "peculiar" cases that the spec explicitly calls out. It also gives an example: > In peculiar cases, the set of pre-processing...