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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
- MbUnit Re: Asserts Jeff Brown
- MbUnit Re: Asserts Andrew Stopford
- MbUnit Re: Asserts Andrew Stopford
Reply via email to
Hi,
I have compared the VSTS asserts to MbUnit
Would support for these be of interest?
Andy
On 7/27/06, Andrew Stopford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
