-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 544
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Support .NET 8 #2465
Comments
I don't think it is necessary to explicitely target .NET 8 in |
While testing it locally I stumbled upon one issue: In the #if NET8_0_OR_GREATER
using ITimer = FluentAssertions.Common.ITimer;
#endif |
Until we need to support specific features, we don't need to target .NET 8 for the main project. However, adding .NET 8 as a target for the tests is indeed useful. This probably also require bumping the SDK in the Next to that, maybe this mean we should either rename our |
The two interfaces are not really compatible: |
which would be a breaking change? |
Correct. Although that interface is only |
What's supposed and how it's used can differ 😉 |
That was my point. Can we somehow make it |
I had a look at the usage of the
In both cases, it does not use recurring events, so it is not the normal use case for a Timer. Also the default implementation uses a For me the naming is a bit misleading, so if we want to rename the |
Isn't our |
I had to add the following code to the #if NET8_0_OR_GREATER
using ITimer = FluentAssertions.Common.ITimer;
#endif So if a consumer does not use the If you think it a good idea, I am happy to create a pull request to rename it to |
My current vote is on doing nothing. Renaming to |
Or rename it to something specific to this lib (which is weird if someone else uses it)? Like |
Yes and no. More types than I expected are under the |
Background and motivation
On Nov. 14th .NET 8 was released. As this is a major version, I suggest that
fluentassertions
should also support .NET 8 as Target Framework.Alternative Concerns
No response
Are you willing help with a pull-request?
Yes, please assign this issue to me.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: