Stuck on an issue?

Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.

And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.

Improve naming scheme of parameterized tests

See original GitHub issue

With the new parameter() directive, the test names can become really large and not easy to handle, so we need to find an alternative naming scheme.

Issue Analytics

State:
Created 3 years ago
Comments:11 (11 by maintainers)

Top GitHub Comments

1reaction

vkarakcommented, Sep 3, 2021

If the test gets parametrised due to fixtures, then its name will have to change. In the example above, we could have a name such as TestA%f.f.p=1. If it had another parametrised fixture named g with parameter q could be TestA%f.f.p=1%g.q=1 and so on. Implementation-wise it might not be so straightforward, but let’s see 😃

Regarding the hash, I agree that it should be the standard name addressing mechanism, but I would rather compute the hash based on the raw information, i.e., class name + fixture index + parameter index or anything else that’s not based on the name.

0reactions

vkarakcommented, Oct 29, 2021

This was eventually addressed by #2166. See #2248 for improving the user experience.