Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Add ability to run tests by part of a name. #470

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
jgebal opened this issue Aug 26, 2017 · 5 comments · Fixed by #1203
Closed

Add ability to run tests by part of a name. #470

jgebal opened this issue Aug 26, 2017 · 5 comments · Fixed by #1203
Assignees

Comments

@jgebal
Copy link
Member

jgebal commented Aug 26, 2017

Currently you need to specify a full name to execute test procedure / suite / package
Example:

exec ut.run('owner.test_package');
--or
exec ut.run('owner.test_package.test_procedure');

We could add ability to use '*' at the end of the package name to run all tests/suites by part of the name.
So I could call:

exec ut.run('owner.test_p*');
--or
exec ut.run('owner.test_package.test_pr*');

Adding the '*' at the end of the name should be most easy and most beneficial.

Allowing '*' in any place of name would be more natural, but there is very little value in it and implementation of such feature would be a bigger effort.

@Pazus
Copy link
Member

Pazus commented Aug 26, 2017

Idea. Introduce ability to specify patterns in regex format. For example:
ut.run('{test_suite_number\d+}.main_test');

@jgebal jgebal changed the title Add abulity to run tests by part of a name. Add ability to run tests by part of a name. Aug 31, 2017
@Shoelace
Copy link
Member

Shoelace commented Oct 9, 2018

why use '*' or a regexp?
would a standard oracle LIKE operator not be more natural?
or you could support both styles with eitehr an optional parameter or a prefix
ie
ut.run('test_suite_number%.main_test'); or ut.run('re:{test_suite_number\d+}.main_test');

you could predefine an escape character for like to be \ also

@alesana-san
Copy link

I guess this is solved by putting --%context annotation or using tags.

@pesse
Copy link
Member

pesse commented Apr 1, 2020

Yes, I think especially tags are a good substitute.
Should we close it, @jgebal ?

@jgebal
Copy link
Member Author

jgebal commented Apr 1, 2020

I would keep it open. It's still a good idea.
Someone might pick it up at some point.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

6 participants