Comments

@Charles:

Honestly man, Z3 is the closest thing to real magic i've ever seen... i just dont get how it works and how it can be so fast!

Bart de smet wrote some posts on Z3 and started a series on Linq-to-Z3, but he never finished it :/ he actually wrote a working sodoku solver using it! you should talk to him about that

@felix9:

that might be a while though

@Charles:

no, i didn't but i have now. i think my comment is still valid though, i still do not see a good reason for limiting code digger to pcl.. most methods will be resonably pure anyway even if they are not in a portable library, also its not like pex crashed if it ran into a parser or some reflection, it just ran in to its depth/constraint limit, why cant code digger do the same?

Granted, i'm not even near as clever as the rise guys, but is there really no way to run into those constraint limits anyway?

it was heartening to hear that a complete version of pex was on its way, but i also remember getting involved in the pex community and evangilizing pex left and right during its first run only for the pex team to essencially turn its back on the community, first saying an update was coming "soon" then  shutting down the forums and not updating the project page for like 2 years.  Yes, that's a risk any early adopter/beta tester takes but it still sucks when it happens..

Pex is an awsome technology, there is nothing out there like it and it just be such a terrible shame if it fell into obscurity.

its great that we finaly see a sign of life from what used to be pex..

But in its present form, code digger is not very useful.. limiting the exploration to portable libraries just makes no sense.. pex had no problem with regular libaries so why does code digger?

Also, pretty much all the features that made pex useful are stripped from code digger.. it makes very little sense (other than mabe from an economic perspective) since VS is well known to have excelent backwards compatibility for extensions. [even more so between vs2010 and sp1 and sp2]

still its good to see that the pex is not just vaporware

cool stuff

but I don't get the whole Add/AddRange problem, the following code work just fine right? am I missing something?

    public class List<T>
    {
        public void Add(T item){
        
        }
        public void Add(IEnumerable<T> items) { 
        
        }
    }
...
test.Add("hello");
test.Add(new[] { "world" });

Totally awesome

yay, nick is back

Again, i'd just to clarify, the reason im on about Bcl is that i think it would greatly speed Rx adoption within the framework itself.. i'd like to see more apis expose iobservables especially in wpf/xaml.. rx support in databinding? yes please language support? one can dream..

I think rx is a really fondational technology that almost every app can use. its the same (but opposite) as IEnumerable for crying out loud

i ask you this, what could .net be like if only the IEnumerable interface was in the Bcl and all the combinators lived in a separate library?

I really hope you dont think i'm trying to troll you or be a jerk, i just think rx is awsome and the bar of entry should be as low as it could possibly get

dan, you look like you know some stuff.... about the future of kinect/kinect sdk maybe....? that you cant really talk about...? or.....?

yes yes i know.. its all secrect 

@Maddus Mattus:

ideally, yeah raising events is also a pain, especially if it supposed to be thread safe.. checking if the event is null? whats up with that..