Is there any particular reason not to use NUnit?
Apologies if this has already been discussed. I might have missed it.
NUnit 3 (when Charlie finally releases it will be multi threaded like (the
dead) Gallio MbUnit is. Plus it probably won't be dead either.
On Wednesday, 11 June 2014, Heath Stewart <hea...@outlook.com> wrote:
> I've changed quite a bit of the infrastructure as well, but xunit
> doesn't support initialization and tear-down and a lot of other things
> required by many of our tests. I can rename the attribute back but I
> wouldn't say xunit is a solid replacement.
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ------------------------------
> From: Rob Mensching <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','r...@firegiant.com');>
> Sent: 6/10/2014 12:11 PM
> To: WiX toolset developer mailing list
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','wix-devs@lists.sourceforge.net');>
> Subject: Re: [WiX-devs] Test overhaul
>
> I only moved a few Burn projects to Xunit to prove that it could be
> done (added NamedFactAttribute and other things). I left the others still
> running against MSTest. It’s fantastic if you finished moving the other
> tests.
>
>
>
> However, please don’t change Xunit to look like MSTest. “NamedFact” was
> named that way to model the fact that Xunit calls tests “Facts”. Also, did
> we use priority and description?
>
>
>
> Also, let’s wait until Xunit goes to 2.0 before moving to it.
>
>
>
> There was a lot of nasty test code and test infrastructure to clean up and
> simplify in there. I totally understand if you only moved the test code and
> didn’t scrub infrastructure. <smile/>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________
>
> FireGiant | Dedicated support for the WiX toolset |
> http://www.firegiant.com/
>
>
>
> *From:* Heath Stewart [mailto:hea...@outlook.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, June 9, 2014 9:40 AM
> *To:* Windows Installer XML toolset developer mailing list
> *Subject:* Re: [WiX-devs] Test overhaul
>
>
>
> It was the changeover that they seemed to all (well, mostly) break. Xunit
> doesn't work the same way as MSBuild or NUnit so any tests that require
> test-case initialization and tear-down would fail. With some extensibility
> I was able to put that behavior back, for the most part. Nearly finished.
>
>
>
> The really, super annoying thing has been having to walk around xunit's
> sticks in the sand, regarding user messages for Asserts (or lack thereof)
> and that even those Asserts that support user messages don't support params
> parameters like String.Format, so I have to add that in everywhere to
> maintain the existing behavior.
>
>
>
> All tests but WixTests are building and almost all of those are passing.
>
>
>
> I also took the opportunity with the extensibility to skip tests that are
> runtime tests when runtime tests aren't enabled rather than fail, skip
> runtime tests that require elevation (the assumed default - tests can
> declare themselves NonPrivileged), and skip tents that are 64-bit specific
> when not running under a 64-bit process. These are effectively trait
> attributes, and will be proper TraitAttribute-derivatives once Xunit 2.0
> releases (or I can now if we want to take a pre-rely, doesn't really change
> much, though).
>
>
>
> Since I had to define a custom attribute anyway, I re
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions
Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems
Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data.
Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing & Easy Data Exploration
http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems
_______________________________________________
WiX-devs mailing list
WiX-devs@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wix-devs
