Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

When a step is not defined display an example step to implement #15

Closed
bkielbasa opened this issue Jun 13, 2019 · 11 comments
Closed

When a step is not defined display an example step to implement #15

bkielbasa opened this issue Jun 13, 2019 · 11 comments
Labels

Comments

@bkielbasa
Copy link
Collaborator

How godog does it :)

image

@bkielbasa bkielbasa added this to the 1.0 milestone Jun 13, 2019
@bkielbasa bkielbasa added the enhancement New feature or request label Jun 15, 2019
@bkielbasa bkielbasa modified the milestones: 1.0, 1.1 Jul 1, 2019
@bkielbasa
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bkielbasa commented Feb 20, 2020

I added the needs investigation label because I'm seeking for other ways of solving the problem.
This is just one of the solutions.

@mirogta
Copy link
Collaborator

mirogta commented Feb 21, 2020

For inspiration:
https://specflow.org/documentation/Generating-Skeleton-Code/

I've used it extensively while on a .NET project... and it's really slick. You can choose to generate a skeleton code or copy content to clipboard for any missing step definitions.

I would envisage that perhaps some flags to the go-bdd runtime could generate the code (i.e. .go files) or perhaps even copy the code to clipboard - using https://github.com/atotto/clipboard ? I understand that adding such dependency might be undesirable. But on the other hand, wouldn't this cover the typical scenario? I mean what would you do with the output in the console - wouldn't you copy it to clipboard and paste to a file? At least I do that with godog. So why not skip that step and put it in the clipboard automatically :-)

I assume that an alternative like pipe the stdout output to a file won't be a typical scenario.

@bkielbasa
Copy link
Collaborator Author

thanks for the link!

I'm not sure if everyone would like such automatization. That's an interference in the user's system.

@bkielbasa
Copy link
Collaborator Author

maybe as an additional library?

@mirogta
Copy link
Collaborator

mirogta commented Feb 23, 2020

maybe as an additional library?

Maybe a VSCode add-on for go-bdd?

@bkielbasa
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Integrations with IDEs are in my plans :) but first of all, we have to have stable API and release the very first stable version of the lib.

@mirogta
Copy link
Collaborator

mirogta commented Feb 23, 2020

Awesome. Happy to contribute, have quite decent experience with TypeScript and always wanted to dive deeper into VSCode extensions development... originally for godog, but this looks like a much nicer project :-)

@bkielbasa
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Nice to hear that :) I'll back to it when we'll release v1.0 :)

@bkielbasa
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@mirogta We're coming closer to the stable version. Are you still interested in building the extension? If yes, I can create a new project in the go-bdd project for the extension and set you as a contributor.

@bkielbasa bkielbasa removed this from the 1.1 milestone Mar 15, 2020
@mirogta
Copy link
Collaborator

mirogta commented Mar 15, 2020

Definitely! I'm following go-bbd updates quite closely :)

@bkielbasa
Copy link
Collaborator Author

closing because we're waiting for a proposal or IDE-specific solution.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants