Comments on: Cuke4Nuke: Cucumber for .NET Teams

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 [...]