Forum: Ruby Test::Unit - "exit" exception/command?

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
Matthew Rudy J. (Guest)
on 2007-07-16 04:04
I'm writing a suite of tests for an sms application.

Because I want to properly test the functionality, it does try to send
real messages, but with a dummy flag attached.

This is fine, except the dummy flag is kept in the database,
(so it isn't loaded until the fixtures load)
(otherwise I'd do a raise in my test_helper definition.)

I've defined an assertion called assert_not_live!,
which is fine,
it stops the TestCase that happens to be running,
but really if such a catastrophic failure occurs,
I want to stop the whole suite...

is there an exception I can raise which deliberately breaks the test
runner or perhaps rake container?
gabriele renzi (Guest)
on 2007-07-16 20:11
(Received via mailing list)
On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 09:04:30 +0900, Matthew R. wrote:

> which is fine,
> it stops the TestCase that happens to be running,
> but really if such a catastrophic failure occurs,
> I want to stop the whole suite...

I was looking for the same thing the other day, I think it would be nice
to have.. I _think_ there could be some way by sending the FINISHED
signal to the testrunner but I'm not sure. Just re-raising your request
:)

BTW, what did you do to stop the testcase?
Matthew Rudy J. (Guest)
on 2007-07-16 20:27
gabriele renzi wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 09:04:30 +0900, Matthew R. wrote:

>
> BTW, what did you do to stop the testcase?

I think I mis-stated that.
I think of each test as a "test case".
Which it is.
gabriele renzi (Guest)
on 2007-07-16 21:22
(Received via mailing list)
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 01:40:25 +0900, Matthew R. wrote:

> gabriele renzi wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 09:04:30 +0900, Matthew R. wrote:
>
>>
>> BTW, what did you do to stop the testcase?
>
> I think I mis-stated that.
> I think of each test as a "test case".
> Which it is.

Ah, I see, and yes, I do agree with you, too bad TestCase is not named
something else :/
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.