Comments on: Cuke4Nuke: Cucumber for .NET Teams

By: Kevin

Kevin — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 23:20:41 +0000

Thanks Richard.

Yes… I didn’t mean to share state between different Scenarios but within the same scenario but different Steps, with the possibility that those steps are defined in different classes.

Yes, I posted a question but none of the answers have convinced me 100%. I don’t like quite like any of the 4 options SpecFlow provides.

By: Richard Lawrence

Richard Lawrence — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 21:58:24 +0000

@Kevin –

I don’t know SpecFlow well, so I can’t answer how it would behave, but I can answer your question for Cuke4Nuke, assuming they work similarly. (I notice you’ve asked the question on the SpecFlow group and received an answer, so this may be unnecesary.)

To share state between step definitions in different classes with Cuke4Nuke, you have both classes require an instance of the same class in their constructors. Cuke4Nuke will ensure they get the same instance.

Cucumber’s runtime model treats each scenario as independent. Cuke4Nuke does the same. So, you can’t share state between scenarios in your test code. You could preserve state in your app, but it’s a good practice to treat scenarios as independent.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 19:14:03 +0000

Hello Richard,

I’ve started to use SpecFlow, which, for what I’ve seen of Cuke4Nuke, it is pretty similar… or at least along the same lines.

Right now I have an issue that has to do with the fact of how to pass state between different scenarios. When the scope of the scenario being tested is limited to the class in which you are standing, it shouldn’t be a problem… you can store the state -whatever that is- in a private member.

But when you define your “Given” or your “Then” in a separate file in benefit of reusability, how do you manage to maintain state?

Thanks,
Kevin

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 14 Jun 2010 22:53:38 +0000

@Marcel – I haven’t tried IronRuby since before it hit 1.0. I’ve heard performance is still an issue, but I haven’t confirmed. In any case, running Cucumber under IronRuby isn’t enough to write step definitions in a language other than Ruby (for example, C#). One day, we may do a version of Cuke4Nuke that uses IronRuby the way Cuke4Duke uses JRuby, but for now, I’m sticking with the current approach.

By: Marcel

Marcel — Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:40:48 +0000

Richard,
Thank you for your great posts.

Do you know if the performance is still in issue, now that we’re on IronRuby 1.0?

Regards,
M

By: Richard

Richard — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 02:50:55 +0000

@Michael – Not that I know of. We’ve talked about doing an in-process version of Cuke4Nuke using IronRuby the way Cuke4Duke uses JRuby, but AFAIK start up time is still an issue.

By: Michael

Michael — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 23:18:58 +0000

Hello Richard,

I have a question about using IronRuby instead of MRI Ruby. Has anyone or have you attempted to use IronRuby for the Cuke4Nuke?

Thanks!

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:10:51 +0000

@Neil – The biggest difference is that Cuke4Nuke actually uses Cucumber as much as possible rather than reimplementing Cucumber in .NET. Quite often features are added to Cucumber that require no changes to Cuke4Nuke. Cuke4Nuke users get these features right away, while SpecFlow users have to wait until the new features are explicitly added to SpecFlow.

Cuke4Nuke doesn’t yet have support for table diffing, so SpecFlow has an advantage there, I believe. SpecFlow also seems to have Visual Studio integration.

Otherwise, in terms of day-to-day use, there’s probably little difference.

By: Neil Mosafi

Neil Mosafi — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 01:40:33 +0000

How is this different to SpecFlow?

By: Tweets that mention Cuke4Nuke: Cucumber for .NET Teams | Richard Lawrence -- Topsy.com

Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:50:35 +0000

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Richard Paul and jbandi. jbandi said: RT @aslak_hellesoy:Great #cuke4nuke writeup by @rslawrence http://bit.ly/Wt7rU [...]