On Aug 29, 1:02 pm, "Jeff Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there a common usage pattern we could extract here into a > general-purpose feature so you wouldn't need to write lots of > decorators? Perhaps a factory that could handle decommission concerns > (such as disposal) for the objects it produces?
Having looked into TestFixtureExtensionAttribute, I *think* I'd have to: 1. Create the attribute itself 2. Have the attribute create an IRun (another class) 3. Have the IRun implement Reflect to (here I run into speculation) decorate the RunInvokerTree (or maybe the RunInvokerVertex?) with a new IRunInvoker (yet another class) 4. Have my IRunInvoker subclass do the actual set up for the test (and maybe the teardown, or maybe that's a separate IRunInvoker?) At that point, I decided that it was more trouble than it was worth and wrote it into my tests' SetUp and TearDown. So yes, I think there's definitely an opening for a EntireTestDecoratorPatternAttribute somewhere, that acts just like the (comparatively simple) TestDecoratorPatternAttribute. What would be best would be if you could just tell the TestDecoratorPatternAttribute if it should wrap the whole process collectively or each part individually. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MbUnit.User" 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/MbUnitUser?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
