Make randomOrder configuration, allowing tests to be run in any order… #128
Conversation
… within their part of the tree.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #128 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 99.45% 99.47% +0.01%
- Complexity 349 361 +12
============================================
Files 43 45 +2
Lines 739 760 +21
Branches 22 22
============================================
+ Hits 735 756 +21
Partials 4 4
|
|
I'm really looking forward to having this feature pushed. @greghaskins @tjarratt Any chances for this to get merged? |
|
I would like to retest this with the gherkin style tests to make sure it can’t scramble them. |
| }); | ||
| }); | ||
| })); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ashleyfrieze Do you imagine needing more than these specs here ☝️ to sufficiently test the Gherkin-style DSL? This scenario seems pretty straightforward to me. I guess you might have a mixed describe where some pieces run in random order, but the right things (given/when/then) stay in the right order.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These do look like they cover the scenario. I've a funny feeling there was something else worrying me about the feature, perhaps relating back to the bug I found in the gherkin tests. If you're going to merge PR #127, why don't we review this again after rebasing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds good. We'll look at it again after #127
… within their part of the tree.
A solution to #47
@tjarratt - what do you think?