Property parsing splits up -p properties into more tokens and breaks `dotnet test`

[nohwnd]

Describe the bug

When testing vstest we provide a property that ends with .dll to point dotnet test to a locally built vstest.console.dll, after update to latest dotnet sdk the build now fails with:

The argument -p:VsTestConsolePath=S:\p\vstest\artifacts\tmp\Debug\extractedPackages\Microsoft.TestPlatform.CLI.18.0.0-dev.nupkg\contentFiles\any\net9.0\vstest.console.dll is invalid. Please use the /help option to check the list of valid arguments.

(in this arcade update: microsoft/vstest#15264 )

This is caused by this check in dotnet sdk, that is no longer false, so we end up calling vstest.console.exe directly, which is INCORRECT:

https://github.com/dotnet/sdk/blob/main/src/Cli/dotnet/Commands/Test/VSTest/TestCommand.cs#L50

The method checks for presence of any argument that ends with .dlll, but is not a property:

https://github.com/dotnet/sdk/blob/main/src/Cli/dotnet/Commands/Test/VSTest/TestCommand.cs#L299

which used to work because the parsed arguments looked like this:

But after this PR and change look like this:

480b58f#diff-99e0f27176e2b38367e3898ec98c6d1a67f2cb629195156f4bc1c57b2ef6670bR30

Meaning that we don't correctly detect that the .dll is part of msbuild property, and offload the work to vstest.console.exe directly.

To Reproduce

Run dotnet test -p:AAA=.dll on net10 rc1 and newer.

[nohwnd]

fyi @baronfel

(but we admittedly rely on non standard way of processing the parameters etc.)

[baronfel]

You shouldn't be accessing the raw tokens like this at all - if you need MSBuild property tokens, you should use the CommonOption for parsing MSBuild properties, which will handle all of the different formats for you. I strongly suspect what you actually want here is to have a bucket for string[] TokensThatWeDon'tExplicitlyHandle, and you should check if any of those satisfy your dll/exe check. All of the other tokens should be bound by actual options. We can hop an a call and chat through it if you like.

[nohwnd]

I agree, the fix PR is minimum that follows the previous logic so I can fix it quickly. I think I know how to look at the arguments / unmatched data, I will try to fix it like that in followup PR. I am just not 100% that we won't break some other edge case scenario.