Re: Fwd: Data-driven Tests in NUnit 2.5

Hi Kelly,

> >  That ship has sailed. :-) Internally, most of what NUnit does
>  >  involves objects because we implement features that can't 
> be  >  done in a static manner. For example, a great deal of 
> type  >  casting is involved when we compare numeric types - 
> everything  >  that normally happens automatically in a 
> numeric expression  >  has to be done explicitly by NUnit at run time.
>  >
>  >  So I'm not minimizing the problems, just saying that we  
> >  already solve them internally without the user knowing  >  
> about it. What you're talking about will just me more  >  of 
> the same old same old. :-)
> 
>  I can see that this is the case. The "requirement" that you 
> proposed  was to have type safety. If we don't have type 
> safety now, why require  it for a future feature? Or do you 
> achieve type safety on some level  now that you want to maintain?

Yes.

>  I'm trying to understand the motivation behind the request 
> for type  safety in the implementation of Theory data sources.

I think I see where this discussion has gotten off track.

I wasn't intending to establish a "requirement" or even make a
"request." I merely made a statement of how I intended to 
proceed with my own programming experiments. I really didn't
anticipate debating about it.

And again: I'm talking about data-driven tests not Theory.

Charlie



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/