It's not about this. It's just that there is a bunch of #if in all tests source files, and this is just because of me :) Pascal.
jabber/gtalk: [email protected] msn: [email protected] On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 15:18, Giacomo Tesio <[email protected]> wrote: > What about using (the mono/dblinq) xmlmappingsouce for mapping and simply > switch the mapping source? > > would this remove the need for different namespaces? > > On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 2:14 PM, Pascal Craponne <[email protected]> wrote: > >> After tests, no, it just doesn't work. My idea: we (I) could write a >> small tool to update all test files, and add #if'ed namespaces >> automatically. >> Pascal. >> >> jabber/gtalk: [email protected] >> msn: [email protected] >> >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 08:09, Pascal Craponne <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I have no idea. I'll make a test and let you know. >>> Pascal. >>> >>> jabber/gtalk: [email protected] >>> msn: [email protected] >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 05:59, Jonathan Pryor <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> The #if removal fix has been committed to the testing-no-db branch. >>>> >>>> Any word on whether namespaces are still a problem for ReSharper? >>>> >>>> - Jon >>>> >>>> On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 23:14 +0100, Pascal Craponne wrote: >>>> >>>> 1. I did this, because I use ReSharper to run unit tests from Visual >>>> Studio. And ReSharper is confused when all tests are in the same namespace, >>>> because it thinks they are the same. >>>> >>>> And all namespaces can be changed at once, with a smart find and >>>> replace, I think (as far as I remember, that's what I did) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2. Nice idea. I buy it (or take it if you give it for free). >>>> >>>> >>>> Pascal. >>>> >>>> jabber/gtalk: [email protected] >>>> msn: [email protected] >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 23:02, Jonathan Pryor <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> It occurs to me that eventually we will want to add support for >>>> additional SQL providers [0]. >>>> >>>> This isn't difficult, but it is annoying, as the tests are full of >>>> conditional compilation logic to switch between the various providers, >>>> change the namespace name, etc.: >>>> >>>> #if MYSQL >>>> namespace Test_NUnit_MySql >>>> #elif ORACLE >>>> #if ODP >>>> namespace Test_NUnit_OracleODP >>>> #else >>>> namespace Test_NUnit_Oracle >>>> #endif >>>> >>>> Changing ~58 files to add new conditional compilation logic for >>>> *each*provider doesn't strike me as a "fun time." >>>> >>>> Thus, two questions: >>>> >>>> 1. Is there any reason to change the namespace based on the assembly >>>> it's going into? I don't understand why the above is done ~everywhere, >>>> just >>>> to change the namespace of the tests, as they're going to be in separate >>>> assemblies anyway. >>>> >>>> Ideally, we could remove this conditional compilation logic and just use >>>> the same namespace for everything. >>>> >>>> 2. TestBase.cs is more complicated, as it wants to define the >>>> XSqlConnection, XSqlCommand, and xint types for each provider. >>>> >>>> xint doesn't seem to actually be used, so it should be removed. >>>> >>>> XSqlConnection and XSqlCommand are a little harder to remove, but there >>>> is a simple solution: partial classes. >>>> >>>> We could "abstract" out TestBase to depend upon members/properties based >>>> upon interfaces instead of concrete types, e.g. code would assume the >>>> presence of a `IDbConnection CreateConnection(string)' method, and use >>>> CreateConnection(connStr) instead of `new XSqlConnection(connStr)'. >>>> >>>> Next, each Test project could supply the "other half" of TestBase, >>>> providing the SQL provider-specific members which TestBase uses, e.g.: >>>> >>>> IDbConnection CreateConnection(string s) >>>> { >>>> return new SqliteConnection(s); >>>> } >>>> >>>> This should allow removing most of the conditional logic within TestBase >>>> to be removed, moving provider-specific logic into the provider-specific >>>> projects. >>>> >>>> Thoughts? >>>> >>>> - Jon >>>> >>>> [0] Offhand, SQL Server Compact Edition and Mono.Data.Sqlite, if we >>>> don't want to wholesale migrate from System.Data.SQLite to Mono.Data.Sqlite >>>> (see previous email). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DbLinq" 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/dblinq?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
