It would be nice to support this scenario:
var number = 5;
var nullableNumber = (int?) 5;
number.Should().Be(nullableNumber);
is better than:
number.Should().Be(nullableNumber.Value)
when nullableNumber is null (we can display a better error message than NullObjectException).
Comments: ** Comment from web user: dennisdoomen **
var number = 5;
var nullableNumber = (int?) 5;
number.Should().Be(nullableNumber);
is better than:
number.Should().Be(nullableNumber.Value)
when nullableNumber is null (we can display a better error message than NullObjectException).
Comments: ** Comment from web user: dennisdoomen **
Ah, I understand now. It wasn't fixed in 1.7.1. It was fixed in the soon to be release 2.0.0. That's why you're still observing this issue.