Re: saving state between fixtures

[email protected] wrote:
> A quick look at the summary fixture shows that it pretty much depends
> on both the key and the value being strings, at least in the Python version.
> What's needed is a somewhat more general way to save state from one
> fixture to another, without it being reported.
> 
> Other than that, I think the location is exactly correct - a second hash
> in Fixture that would allow storing state would be exactly correct. In
> fact, using a hash opens up the intreguing idea of using it as a symbol
> table.

+1. I've used the summary field for storing database connections, for 
example. I know it's not really the right place but, until we add a 
context field, it'll have to do. One advantage it gives is that you can 
set things up in the runner if, for example, you want to refer to 
something external.

I fixed this once in the C# version, but I don't know if the change 
survived.

S.