May be the TestBrowser can also be an option to replace TestRunner as  
mentioned in another thread?

Stef


On 2 nov. 04, at 19:15, Marcus Denker wrote:

>
> Am 02.11.2004 um 06:39 schrieb Andreas Raab:
>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> I don't know how many people out there use 3.8 (or 3.7 for that  
>> matter) but given the behavior of TestRunner I cannot imagine that  
>> many people use it for daily work. In moving some code from 3.6 to  
>> 3.8 I immediately noticed that some important things have been  
>> broken, others removed, as if it were the goal to make it harder to  
>> run tests. How odd.
>>
>> More specifically:
>>
>> #1: As has been pointed out in the thread starting at  
>> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2004-March/ 
>> 074876.html TestRunner is STILL broken if you run any UI tests with  
>> it. It's six months now during which the people who have argued this  
>> broken behavior to be a "feature" have done absolutely nothing to  
>> improve the situation. ARGH!
>>
>
> Ok, yes, I should have put that into the SUnit package sooner... I  
> will soon.
>
>> #2: For some odd reason, someone must have decided that a nicer look  
>> of TestRunner is more important than the work it does. So what we got  
>> in this process is a beautifully anti-aliased progress bar ... and  
>> what we lost is the ability to easily run multiple tests at once  
>> (yeah, who'd need that eh?! ;-)
>>
>>
>
> I was 100% sure that the idea of an abstract testcase was that they  
> are supposed to be abstract classes. (Do not show up in Testrunner,  
> test
> are inherited by the children). I never had the idea to use them for  
> grouping tests... so with that mental model, I added the fixes that  
> removed
> the abstract tests from the testrunner that were postet to the list.
> (Having Abstract classes in the TestRunner has the problem that "run  
> all" then runs tests multiple times).
>
> For grouping, I wanted to add a pane with the sytemcategories to the  
> testrunner. But I havn't yet come around to do that.
>
> Another thing I should look at again is Romain's BrowseUnit. I used an  
> older version a lot.
>
>     Marcus
>
>