Why not using one announcer per instance test instance? That way you are only coupled to test runs you and only you fire. On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Benjamin < benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
Since there is an announcer per test class, you need to write something like
MyClass>>#register MyTestClass announcer on: TestCaseStarted send: #foo to: self.
It means than here you force a link from MyClass to MyTestClass. And if you want to be aware of all test case started, you need something like
TestCase withAllSubclasses do: [:e | e announcer on: TestCaseStarted send: #foo to: self ].
Why not using only one Announcer (and TestAnnouncer already exists and is already integrated) for all test class ?
Ben
On Apr 5, 2012, at 3:50 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
I proposed this test announcement facilities some times ago to get notified when tests are being executed and when they are done.
You said: "It means that you have to know which class to register to instead of which announcer." Which unit to register you mean? Yes, the one you are interested in. I do not see why it break the pattern. Consider TestCaseTest>>testAnnouncement. What is wrong with it?
Cheers, Alexandre
On 5 Apr 2012, at 06:14, Benjamin wrote:
Hello guys,
I was implementing in Nautilus a listener to TestCaseStarted, and then I figured out that each TestCase subclasses have its own Announcer.
It means that you have to know which class to register to instead of which announcer. In a way, it breaks the Observer pattern.
Is there any good reason I am missing ?
I think it has been done in a way you can spy a particular test class, but since you have this info in the announcement itself, you can always filter with this info. Cause for me, replacing all those announcer by TestAnnouncer seems to be a better solution.
Thanks in advance,
Ben
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.