2009/3/5 Paul Hammant <[email protected]>
> Can we do a context yet?
>
> Scenario: foo bar
> Context: for Safari on Windows
> Given blah blah blah....
>
> Perhaps one with implicit looping constructs
>
> Scenario: foo bar
> Context: *once for each browser/os*
> Given blah blah blah....
>
> Or dispatch capability ...
>
> Scenario: foo bar
> Context: once for each browser/os *in parallel*
> Given blah blah blah....
>
> It leverages the same Regex/Annotation magic of course.
>
I like the idea but the word Context gives me hives.
It's actually meta-information about how you can run the scenario, not about
the scenario itself. It would be more like a "hint", to use SQL terminology.
I wonder what a good word would be for that?
Maybe invert it and call it Constraint. So you might have:
Constraints: requires-firefox, not-parallel, uses-sendmail
Actually it seems to fit more into the context of tags. You could tag a
scenario or an entire feature (whose tags would cascade into its scenarios)
and then include or exclude tags for specific kinds of run. We could bake
that into the ant and maven jbehave tasks.
wdyt?
Cheers,
Dan
>
> Regards,
>
> - Paul
>
>
