Re: Am I Running Under NUnit?

Yes, I know reflection :)

I don't understand what's the difficulty in exposing a static
property. Why does AppDomains play a part here? After all, there is
some class Foo (static or not), with a method Bar (static or not),
that runs some loop (with reflection). Why shouldn't this class expose
a property (static or not :)) that let's us know it's currently
running tests?

It's not obligatory to use this property or reference NUnit from
production code, but if a user wishes to do so, I think he should have
the possibility.



On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:23 PM, Charlie Poole
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Ron,
>
> What you suggest would be easy if we had not gone to such great lengths to
> isolate NUnit
> from the test code. :-)
>
> The part of NUnit that runs tests (we call it the core) has no reference to
> the part that
> you use in your tests (we call it the framework) and the framework has no
> reference
> to the core. It's all done by reflection - or smoke and mirrors if you like.
>
> So, exposing a read-only property begs the question: a property of what? It
> has
> to be some object that you can get access to.
>
> Providing you are only referencing the framework, it would be possible to
> have some
> sort of static or singleton that you checked to see if NUnit was running in
> the current
> AppDomain - of course if you are creating other AppDomains, that won't work
> either...
>
> That might be something like
>     if ( NUnit.Framework.TextContext.CurrentContext != null )
>         ...
>
> If that would suit you, it's a possibility for 3.0, where we will have a
> context
> for tests to refer to.
>
> Charlie
>
>
>  ________________________________
>
> From: Ron Gross [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2008 11:23 AM
> To: Charlie Poole
> Cc: [email protected]
>
>
> Subject: Re: [Nunit-users] Am I Running Under NUnit?
>
>
>
> What I mean is this: I would like NUnit to expose some boolean method or
> property that simply says if your main core that loops through the unit
> tests has begun.
> I'm sure you have method in your code similar to:
>
> void RunSelectedTests()
> {
>   ..
>   foreach (test in unit tests)
>   {
>     ...
>     test.Run();
>   }
> }
>
> What I want is a slight addition to this method:
>
> void RunSelectedTests()
> {
>   ..
>   _runningUnderNUnit = true;
>   foreach (test in unit tests)
>   {
>     ...
>     test.Run();
>   }
> }
>
> With the variable _runningUnderNUnit exposed through a read-only property.
> Seems rather easy to implement.
>
> I'm referencing NUnit from some of my production code, because there are
> certain things (logging, for example) that I want to do only if I'm in the
> context of a unit test, and my current method of detecting if I'm in NUnit
> or not, from this post, requires a reference. I'm aware that there are other
> ways to accomplish this, configuration for example, but the above approach
> seems simpler.
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 8:49 PM, Charlie Poole <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Hi Ron,
> >
> > Our conversation appears to have fallen off the list - I put us back on
> it.
> >
> > I'm confused... You already reference NUnit from your production code?
> > I'm assuming that's what we are talking about - if you want to figure out
> > whether your tests are running under NUnit or some other runner, that's
> > a different - perhaps a simpler - matter.
> >
> > As far as being forced to use a hack: the entire notion seems like a
> > hack to me, and NUnit can't do anything to improve it. We can't even
> > hide the hack for you, since we have no general way to determine if
> > some arbitrary code is running under NUnit - and it would have to be
> > a general solution if NUnit implemented it, while you can simply do
> > something that works for your own particular case.
> >
> > In fact, NUnit's lack of knowledge of where threads originate is already
> > a source of difficulty for us - one I hope to solve as part of the 3.0
> rewrite.
> >
> > If I'm misunderstanding something here, please let me know, but this
> > does not sound like a service NUnit can readily provide.
> >
> > Charlie
> >
> > I
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
>
> > From: Ron Gross [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 11:13 PM
> >
> >
> >
> > To: Charlie Poole
> > Subject: Re: [Nunit-users] Am I Running Under NUnit?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > So you think it's better for me to do this hacks than for you to expose a
> method?
> > After all, I am dependant on NUnit and reference it anyway.
> >
> > Only this way, I'm forced to these ugly hacks.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 12:52 AM, Charlie Poole
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes, your original method suffers from the same problem if threads are
> involved.
> > >
> > > If we exported such a function, then people would have to reference it,
> making their apps
> > > dependent on NUnit - so no. :-)
> > >
> > > Another possibility is to look at the entry assembly and see if it's
> nunit.exe or nunit.console.
> > > However, that may not work in a secondary AppDomain - I'm not sure.
> > >
> > > Charlie
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
>  From: Ron Gross [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 1:13 PM
> > > To: Charlie Poole
> > > Subject: Re: [Nunit-users] Am I Running Under NUnit?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The 2nd way is not perfect, because if the call is made from another
> thread then its stack will not have any NUnit frames.
> > > Is there a chance such a function can be exported from NUnit itself in
> some future release?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Charlie Poole
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi Ron,
> > > >
> > > > The code is wrong on several levels:
> > > >
> > > > 1) Tactically, because it will fail if your test references a
> different version of the framework than the one it
> > > > was built against.
> > > >
> > > > 2) Strategically, because the presense of a Test attribute doesn't
> have to mean your test is running under
> > > > NUnit. However, it may be so for a particular user who never calls the
> tests any other way.
> > > >
> > > > There are two simple ways to test whether you are running under
> NUnit...
> > > >
> > > > One is to look at the friendly name of the current appdomain, which is
> "domain-<project>" where <project>
> > > > is the name of the assembly or project being executed. Obviously, this
> is subject to name clashes.
> > > >
> > > > The other - and more accurate - is to search the stack for the name of
> the nunit.core assembly.
> > > >
> > > > Charlie
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
>  From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ron Gross
> > > > Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 7:50 AM
> > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > Subject: [Nunit-users] Am I Running Under NUnit?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > How can I implement a function AmIRunningUnderNUnit() ?
> > > > I have a logger, and I want to Log only if I'm running under NUnit.
> > > >
> > > > This is a suggested solution:
> > > > http://geekswithblogs.net/ajohns/archive/2004/08/05/9389.aspx
> > > >
> > > > But it doesn't work if the test spawns different threads and the
> function is called from there.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Ron
> > > >
> > > >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference
> > > > Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save
> $100.
> > > > Use priority code J8TL2D2.
> > > >
> http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Nunit-users mailing list
> > > > [email protected]
> > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nunit-users
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone