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
Add feature scoped interceptors... #1844
Add feature scoped interceptors... #1844
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1844 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 80.44% 80.77% +0.32%
- Complexity 4337 4386 +49
============================================
Files 441 442 +1
Lines 13534 13767 +233
Branches 1707 1726 +19
============================================
+ Hits 10888 11120 +232
+ Misses 2008 2005 -3
- Partials 638 642 +4 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
spock-core/src/main/java/org/spockframework/runtime/model/FeatureInfo.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
d3aa0f0
to
c5141f1
Compare
spock-core/src/main/java/org/spockframework/runtime/PlatformSpecRunner.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
spock-core/src/main/java/org/spockframework/runtime/model/FeatureInfo.java
Show resolved
Hide resolved
[source,groovy,indent=0] | ||
---- | ||
include::{sourcedir}/extension/InterceptorSpec.groovy[tag=interceptor-class] | ||
---- |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we just leave this out?
It does not really add much value.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not sure, we'd need to replace the I
in the examples. It is only separate because I couldn't find a way to get rid of the indent for the other includes otherwise.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we need to replace it?
Or do I expect too much transfer ability from the reader that he knows that is a class implementing the listener interface?
Then we could keep it of course. :-D
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In the worst case, they could look at the doc-spec where this is coming from. :-)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Or do I expect too much transfer ability from the reader that he knows that is a class implementing the listener interface?
Yes, I think for new readers it would be confusing.
In the worst case, they could look at the doc-spec where this is coming from. :-)
🤔 It would be nice to automatically have a link to the sources under the code snippets.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Your wish is my command: #1904 :-)
spock-specs/src/test/groovy/org/spockframework/smoke/Interceptors.groovy
Show resolved
Hide resolved
spock-specs/src/test/groovy/org/spockframework/smoke/Interceptors.groovy
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
spock-specs/src/test/groovy/org/spockframework/smoke/Interceptors.groovy
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
spock-specs/src/test/groovy/org/spockframework/smoke/Interceptors.groovy
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
3437800
to
a7642b5
Compare
a7642b5
to
f18f0d7
Compare
c6874b0
to
bc059a5
Compare
spock-specs/src/test/groovy/org/spockframework/docs/extension/InterceptorSpec.groovy
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
4e0e0cb
to
66ab97c
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM :-)
of initializer/setup/cleanup methods.