All 39 observed attempts to publish packages to our NuGet feeds were rejected.

The observed attempts to access other customers' data or restricted resources were rejected. Tens of thousands of requests targeting our core systems did not result in unauthorised access.

Did I just read about good security practices? It certainly feels like a nice change compared to catastrophic or non-transparent reports we often see from other parties.

That they can trace, analyze, and recognize the attack activities and consequences stood out to me as well. (It's a topic/target in my work environment too.)

Dunno if struct unions made it, but if they did - there should be a way to avoid boxing with object.

If they didn't make it - yeah, the feature is fucking useless 😅

You mean like the "single bracketed expression" syntax we've had since... hell, I don't even know, C#4?

List<string> items =
[
    new(capacity: 10),
    "First",
    "Second",
    "Third"
];

var items = new List<string>(capacity: 10)
{
    "First",
    "Second",
    "Third"
};

Why not just post the article from the C# docs instead? The pvs blog seems to add little to no additional information.

Seriously, it's EXACTLY as verbose as the thing it's trying to replace. What problem does this solve?

How is it as verbose? It can replace multiple lines of Adds with a single bracketed expression

• Union types

I know this is something folks have been clamoring for for a long time. It looks to me, though, like you're still dealing with object casts, under the hood, so not sure how useful this will be.

• Closed hierarchies

Neat. Niche, but neat. I could see myself using this.

• Labeled break and continue

Boy, this one feels like it should have existed a decade ago. I will ABSOLUTELY be using this.

• Extension indexers

I.E. we can now polyfill Range support. Cool.

• Collection expression arguments

I am absolutely mindboggled by anyone who thinks this syntax is a good idea. Seriously, it's EXACTLY as verbose as the thing it's trying to replace. What problem does this solve?

• Memory safety

Sounds neat, I guess. Doubt I'll ever use it.

Ever since finding mise I never looked back, oh need dotnet 8 in this folder? mise use dotnet@8 boom done

It can be the very best tool sometimes. If you have a property to test, or if you have an oracle, or a brute force method. For example you want to refactor a complex method. Just take a copy of that method in the tests as the oracle and set up a Sample test so that they always agree and refactor away. You can also put a Faster test on it at the same time and prove it's 3x faster say. It's just more robust than a few examples.

@AnthonyLloydI definitely should try it. I've been doing some property based testing with FsCheck from time to time for the past 5 years and i find it a thing from another world. Too much F# and academia;-) Not for "bloody enterprise", lol.

This is a feature specification testing just added to CsCheck. FsCheck doesn't have something similar.

CsCheck and FsCheck cover the same sort of testing areas but do things in very different ways. I'd say CsCheck is more complete but I'm biased.

@AnthonyLloydIs it something kind of FsCheck, but better?

Whenever I see performance in the title and Toub as author I brace for a long great article.

Excellent article. Not only shown how to use it, but also what are alternatives and why use unions instead of them.

dead

Connection timed out Error code 522

That’s a pretty cool flex, I gotta say.

Despite the name, WebApplicationFactory is not MVC-specific — it works with any ASP.NET Core app (Minimal APIs, Web API, MVC, Razor Pages). The "Mvc" in Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Testing is just historical baggage from before Minimal APIs existed. It's the standard integration testing host for the whole ASP.NET Core ecosystem. As for having it as a lib dependency: since KiwiQuery.EFCore is explicitly a testing library, pulling in a testing package is expected.

Is the MVC requirement a lib development dependency to cover MVC use cases, or can I only use it in MVC projects?

Looks like WebApplicationFactory is in the MVC namespace, so I assume this is only for MVC [integration] testing?

Not the first time I think damn, let me check what my legacy projects have, and it's several versions higher.

Such long term support is a rare but very valuable thing. I'm glad my legacy is not that legacy/far behind, though.

Wow I didn't realize 2.x was even still supported.

So, I had a version of Win10 that apparently didn't have .Net 3.5 Framework on it. It took an act of congress to get it to install. I eventually found a version of 4.x that included 3.5 in it. This installed.

I don't understand how I could have that much trouble with one of Microsoft's flagship products. Also, I could dig up programs I used on Windows 3.1 that would probably still run today. I get that things get old, but .Net 3.5 is not that old, at least compared to something that would run on Windows 3.1.

It bugs me that they think everyone can just move everything to the next .Net version every time one rolls out.

Man, it wasn't that long ago that I worked at a place that still has a classic ASP web page running.

Happy Eyeballs Support in Socket.ConnectAsync

happy eyeballs 👀

I think it's actually because of Typescript. Your ASP.net servers need to be able handle variables with emoji names.

Rune support in all string consumers and compares 😆 MS really working on the hard hitters and Def not driven by emoji-loving llm content...

The real question is; does 😁 equate to ☺️ if you ignore case!?

And don't worry, the AI absolutely won't decide to give itself access to the files all on its own after you tell it no.

I'm sure this gets downvotes because AI. The post talks more about dotnet and webassembly though, and gains through it. Not about AI (beyond the marketing speak referencing the product itself).