Re: Extension Points in NUnit 2.5

Kelly Anderson schrieb:
>>  > >  GENERAL:
>>  > >
>>  > >   I'd like to implement the feature whereby addins needed
>>  > >   by a test are declared using an assembly attribute. If
>>  > >   there is no declaration, things work just like now. If
>>  > >   an addin is declared but is not installed, the entire
>>  > >   test fails.
>>  >
>>  > I'm not sure what this means exactly... but it doesn't sound bad. :-)
>>
>>  We had some discussion about this on one of the lists - I'm not
>>  sure which. Essentially, you can optionally provide a sort of
>>  manifest of addins needed to run a test. For example...
>>
>>    [assembly:RequiredExtension("IterativeTestExtension")]
>>     
>
> Oh, that. Right, that's really good.
>
>   
>>  If it's not available, the whole thing fails.
>>     
>
> Could we make it so that only the tests that depend on the extension
> fail, and the other tests run to their natural conclusion? I don't
> like it when one problem keeps the whole things from working. In
> contracts, I think they call it severability. Just because one part of
> the contract is judged to be unenforcable, the rest of the contract is
> still in force.
>   
I think it's better that the whole thing fails if an addin is missing 
which is specified as required. Since NUnit does not know what the 
missing addins would do the result of the test run could be wrong. For 
example, a test decorator which would cause a test to fail - e.g. a 
Timeout decorator - could not be applied and the test would be green though.

Andreas


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/