** Changed in: nunit-3.0
Status: Fix Committed = Fix Released
--
Should not report tests in abstract class as invalid
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/488002
You received this bug notification because you are a member of NUnit
Developers, which is subscribed to NUnit V2.
Status in NUnit
I think I understand what you mean now. Is the difference that if the
class is abstract but not sealed, you assume that the intention is that
it will be inherited from as a base test fixture, whereas if it is
abstract and sealed you show a warning because it can't be a test
fixture?
--
Should
Regarding abstract but not sealed - that's just a convention that identifies
a .NET 2.0 or later
static class. In earlier versions of NUnit, static classes could not be tests,
which ruled out F#.
I'll look at the changes and get back to you.
--
Should not report tests in abstract class as
Charlie, is this definitely a problem on the current trunk? I tried to
reproduce it (by making the same changes that you made to nunitv2) and
the test runner didn't produce any warnings. Also, you removed two tests
about not being able to run abstract fixtures and added two tests about
being able
** Changed in: nunitv2
Status: In Progress = Fix Committed
--
Should not report tests in abstract class as invalid
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/488002
You received this bug notification because you are a member of NUnit
Core Developers, which is the registrant for NUnit Framework.
5 matches
Mail list logo
