Re: [nunitv3] RE: Another Question of Naming

2008/9/12 Charlie Poole <[email protected]>:
> Hi Olof,
>
> It's good to see I'm not the only one who thinks
> naming is important. :-)
>
>> So we started with these four names:
>>
>> TestCase( object, object, ... )
>> TestCases( string )
>> Values( object, object, ... )
>> DataSource( string )
>>
>> .. and now we are here:
>>
>> TestCase
>> TestCases
>> Values
>> ParameterSource
>
> Yes... it made sense all alone but when
> you line them up, it doesn't.
>
>> I liked ValueSource( string ) better than ParameterSource
>> since it clings better to Values, so it is more analogous to
>> the TestCase, TestCases pair.
>>
>> But then again the only thing differentiating TestCase and
>> TestCases is singular/plural form.
>
> True
>
>> I guess the hurdle is that the concept of a "named source" is
>> used in both pairs, but the name "Source" only in one. It is
>> a bit inconsequent. Either both should use Source, or none of them:
>>
>> 1.
>> TestCase
>> TestCaseSource
>> Values
>> ValuesSource>
>> 2.
>> TestCase
>> TestCases
>> Values
>> ValuesLookup (or something ..)
>
> #1 is better in my view...
>
> So we can extract some naming principles from this...
>
> 1. The inline and named source attributes for each type
> should contain a common part like TestCase or Value that
> ties them together.
>
> 2. The naming pattern of all inline sources together
> should be the same. My preference is to use the "bare"
> form, as we are doing so far.
>
> 3. The naming pattern of all named sources should
> be the same, such as adding "Source" to the bare form.
>
> 4. Every other source type should work the same way
> as we develop them... for example:
>     ExcelTestCases versus ExcelValues
>     DataBaseTestCaseSource versus DataBaseValueSource
> [I'm not actually proposing those names, just illustrating.]
>
> So, back to our immediate problem, I'm ready to go for
> a slight modification to your #1:
>
>> TestCase
>> TestCaseSource
>> Values
>> ValueSource
>
> I dropped the plural in Value source, simply because
> a "source of values" is a "value source" in English.
> I could live with it if others prefer, however.
>
> What do you think?

I think my english is inferior to yours, so go for it!

:)

cya

/Olof

>
> Charlie
>
>> > Charlie
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: [email protected]
>> >> [mailto:[email protected]] On
>> Behalf Of
>> >> Olof Bjarnason
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 6:32 AM
>> >> To: [email protected]
>> >> Cc: cliff vaughn; [email protected]
>> >> Subject: Re: [nunit-developer] [nunitv3] RE: Another Question of
>> >> Naming
>> >>
>> >> OK I understand the ValuesAttribute / DataSourceAttribute now.
>> >>
>> >> And I agree with cliff that Value[s]Source is more readable than
>> >> DataSource:
>> >>
>> >> Test]
>> >> public void AdditionIsCommutative(
>> >>        [Values(0, 1, 42, 99)] int a,
>> >>        [ValueSource("b-values")]int b) {
>> >>        Assert.That( a+b == b+a );
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2008/9/9 Charlie Poole <[email protected]>:
>> >> > Those are possibilities...
>> >> >
>> >> > Charlie
>> >> >
>> >> > ________________________________
>> >> > From: cliff vaughn [mailto:[email protected]]
>> >> > Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 9:24 PM
>> >> > To: Charlie Poole
>> >> > Cc: [email protected];
>> [email protected]
>> >> > Subject: Re: [nunit-developer] Another Question of Naming
>> >> >
>> >> > What about ValueSource or ValuesSource?
>> >> >
>> >> > On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 6:57 PM, Charlie Poole
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hi All,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'm still not happy with one of the attribute names we are
>> >> using for
>> >> >> parameterized tests, so I'm asking for ideas, opinions and
>> >> >> suggestions.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Here's what we have now...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You can specify entire test cases together or individual
>> >> values for
>> >> >> parameters, which NUnit then combines into test cases
>> >> using various
>> >> >> strategies.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> If you go with full test cases, they can either be inline or
>> >> >> separately named and referenced...
>> >> >>  TestCase( 1.2, 3.0 )   // Inline
>> >> >>  TestCases( "myCases")  // Separate
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Similarly, if you go with individual parameters, they can
>> >> be inline
>> >> >> or separate...
>> >> >>  Values(12, 7, 3)       // Inline
>> >> >>  DataSource("myValues") // Separate
>> >> >>
>> >> >> We'll be adding others - cases in a spreadsheet, etc. -
>> >> but these are
>> >> >> the four basic ones.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'm quite happy with TestCase, TestCases and Values.
>> >> >> I find them quite readable and others have said the same.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> But DataSource strikes me as a bit too generic. It
>> doesn't tell me
>> >> >> that it's a set of single parm values rather than a
>> test case. It
>> >> >> sounds like it might have something to do with a DB. But
>> >> for the life
>> >> >> of me I can't think of anything better.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Ideas?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Charlie
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> >> ---- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move
>> >> >> Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based
>> >> applications with
>> >> >> Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for
>> two to an
>> >> >> Open Source event anywhere in the world
>> >> >> http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> nunit-developer mailing list
>> >> >> [email protected]
>> >> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nunit-developer
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > thanks
>> >> >
>> >> > cliff
>> >> >
>> >> > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
>> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to
>> the Google
>> >> > Groups "NUnitV3" group.
>> >> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To
>> >> > unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> >> > [email protected]
>> >> > For more options, visit this group at
>> >> > http://groups.google.com/group/nunitv3?hl=en
>> >> > -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> -----------
>> >> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move
>> >> Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based
>> >> applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize
>> >> is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the
>> >> world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> nunit-developer mailing list
>> >> [email protected]
>> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nunit-developer
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
> Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
> Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
> http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
> _______________________________________________
> nunit-developer mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nunit-developer
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/