[nem-en] [NemerleUnit] What about other attributes available in NUnit?

[Kamil Dworakowski]

Andrey Khropov wrote:
> To fully explore all the features present in NUnit we need to support other
> notions present in NUnit in form of attributes:
>   
That was never my intention to support all the features of NUnit. My aim 
was to make a DSL to write readable tests. I will object to any change 
that would compromise that goal.

I think that with NemerleUnit in  its current state I can implement 95% 
unit tests I want. For the remaining 5% I would use NUnit directly. For 
instance, Template Pattern for tests where you create an abstract 
TestFixture class and concrete TestFixture subclasses (sometimes done to 
test interfaces or abstract classes).

> 1) TestFixture
>  AFAIKS the current implementation implicitly adds this attribute to the
> current    enclosing type when test macro is executed. Maybe it's Ok or maybe
> there should be a testfixture macro (for consistency with test macro style):
>
>
> testfixture MyFixture // translated to [TestFixture] module MyFixture
> {
> 	...
> }
>   

That would allow for having two test fixtures in one file, but it's 
probably hard to implement. Currently there is a fixture made 
automatically for your testing pleasure.

> 2) TestFixtureSetup, TestFixtureTearDown.
>   
They would not be easy to add and are rarely needed at the same time.
> 3) ExpectedException, Platform, Category, Explicit, Ignore
>
>    These cases are more complicated. Can we add attributes like always:
>
> 	[ExpectedException(typeof(InvalidOperationException))]
> 	test MyTest
> 	{
>
> 	}
>
> 	?
>   
These should be easy to add. I would do sth like

expect_exception exception_type "decription for the test"
{
}

ignore_test "name"
{
}

Kamil Dworakowski