| 2013-11-03 14:20:04 |
Charlie Poole |
description |
I'm aware that in the past similar request were rejected (for example ID: 878856). However I'll try once again giving some rationale for this.
Here: http://www.nunit.org/wiki/doku.php?id=dev:vision it is clearly stated: "support use of NUnit for integration and acceptance testing, but only to the extent that this support didn't interfere with our primary goal"
Even if this would not be written all we know that NUnit is not only used for unit testing but for all kinds of automatic testing, for example running web pages (Selenium), WinForms (project White), and many other purposes.
In general creating full setup in integration test scenario is costly. Other reason: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1078658/nunit-test-run-order/2889524#2889524. Also good justification here: http://aspadvice.com/blogs/ssmith/archive/2005/04/12/1858.aspx
In my particular test I have an integration with database: test if account creates, then if address for this account creates, then test if payment for this account suceeds, then ... (very long user case chain). While it is possible to create independent tests it is difficult to do, causes code repetition and slows down testing.
Adding additional ordering attribute should not break primary goal: pure unit testing can be still possible when not using this special attribute.
It seems for me that such an attribute would not be costly in implementation effort. Especially in comparison with other sophisticated NUnit functionality. |
[This issue is now tracked at https://github.com/nunit/nunit-framework/issues/51]
I'm aware that in the past similar request were rejected (for example ID: 878856). However I'll try once again giving some rationale for this.
Here: http://www.nunit.org/wiki/doku.php?id=dev:vision it is clearly stated: "support use of NUnit for integration and acceptance testing, but only to the extent that this support didn't interfere with our primary goal"
Even if this would not be written all we know that NUnit is not only used for unit testing but for all kinds of automatic testing, for example running web pages (Selenium), WinForms (project White), and many other purposes.
In general creating full setup in integration test scenario is costly. Other reason: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1078658/nunit-test-run-order/2889524#2889524. Also good justification here: http://aspadvice.com/blogs/ssmith/archive/2005/04/12/1858.aspx
In my particular test I have an integration with database: test if account creates, then if address for this account creates, then test if payment for this account suceeds, then ... (very long user case chain). While it is possible to create independent tests it is difficult to do, causes code repetition and slows down testing.
Adding additional ordering attribute should not break primary goal: pure unit testing can be still possible when not using this special attribute.
It seems for me that such an attribute would not be costly in implementation effort. Especially in comparison with other sophisticated NUnit functionality. |
|
