MbUnit Re: Asserts

Thu, 27 Jul 2006 01:27:20 -0700

NUnit and MbUnit share the same type of license (based on gzip) so as long as any credits remain in place it could be ported over. I am sure that the NUnit guys would be happy for us to do this as long as we credit and vice-versa.
 
The C# 3.0 _expression_ trees is not something I have looked at, please do feel free to see how this could be useful.
 
Jeff if you could find a way of improving the build support and compilation I would really welcome that.
 
Andy

 
On 7/26/06, Jeff Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I could _really_ use AssertNotEqual...
I think it's worth migrating these over.  Out of curiosity, would there be any legal issues with porting the code from NUnit instead of implementing work-alikes?  Seems to me the xUnit's would benefit from a little consolidation.
 
Thinking ahead, some interesting avenues open up with C# 3.0 _expression_ trees that may obviate most of the specialized asserts.  I have been thinking it would be worthwhile to build 1.1 and 2.0 versions of MbUnit using conditional compilation and improved build scripts.  When C# 3.0 comes along, we can add support for that in the same way.  I don't like the MbUnit.Framework.1.1 assembly approach.
 
Jeff.

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Phil Haack
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 8:18 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected]
Subject: MbUnit Re: Asserts

 

Definitely useful.  Kind of helpful to have them just for the sake of migrating from NUnit to MbUnit. When I made the switch, I had update all my unit tests that were using AreNotEqual.

 

Phil

 

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] On Behalf Of Andrew Stopford
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2006 2:45 AM
To: [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: MbUnit Asserts

 

Hi,

 

While writing up a blog post on MbUnit asserts I noticed the following that NUnit has compared to MbUnit.

  • AreNotEqual
  • IsEmpty
  • IsNotEmpty

Type Asserts

  • IsNaN
  • IsInstanceofType
  • IsNotInstanceOfType
  • IsAssignableFrom
  • IsNotAssignableFrom

We do have a lot of asserts on them as well :) and we may have some cross over (point it out if thats the case) but it's struck me that we may have some missing functionality so I would like to know if these are of value to you in your testing toolbox and if you want them added?

 

Andy

 

 

 





--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to