<?xml version="1.0"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="/rss.xsl"?><rss version="2.0"><channel><title>classtester Forum Rss Feed</title><link>http://www.codeplex.com/classtester/Thread/List.aspx</link><description>classtester Forum Rss Description</description><item><title>New Post: A few feature requests/documentation issues</title><link>http://classtester.codeplex.com/Thread/View.aspx?ThreadId=242723</link><description>&lt;div style="line-height: normal;"&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Hi all, neat project!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I've been playing with the thought of making something similar, and am very happy someone's already done so :-).&amp;nbsp; However, there are a few features that would be nice to see, and hopefully at least some of them sound interesting and doable to you too.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I'd like to test types without much regard for their structure.&amp;nbsp; There's two possible approaches here: AssemblyTester, and PropertyTester&amp;#43;ConstructorTester.&amp;nbsp; Using the former is a little too wide-scale for me, so I'm using the latter.&amp;nbsp; However,
 this makes some type-testing a hassle since PropertyTester requires an object, not a type:&amp;nbsp; that means you can't test types without manually constructing them - implying manually picking constructor values.&amp;nbsp; It'd be nice to be able to specify just
 a type, and have PropertyTester essentially work as ConstructorTester with the additional factor that it further tests properties on the constructed objects - not just &amp;quot;mapped&amp;quot; properties, but all of them.&amp;nbsp; This would enable testing on a per-type fashion
 without knowledge of the type internals.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Secondly, it's not documented what kind of properties are tested: in particular, are private properties or public properties with a private accessor tested?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Thirdly, as I understand it, the constructor-tester checks that parameters are correctly stored &amp;quot;in&amp;quot; the appropriate properties.&amp;nbsp; However, it doesn't check that all parameters actually correspond to properties; in particular, this means that a misspelled
 constructor parameter (or a refactored property that no longer corresponds to the constructor's parameter) isn't tested.&amp;nbsp; That's unfortunate; it'd be nice if either by default or optionally one could require that all constructor parameters must be matched
 to exactly one property - so that slightly mangled names don't silently cause incorrect initialization to be unnoticed.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Finally, I use simple immutable types frequently - and here it makes sense to have public readonly fields rather than properties (to communicate the fact that the field won't be changing).&amp;nbsp; In practice, even a mutable type - as long as it's not part
 of a stable binary API - can use public fields equivalently to public automatic properties, but with less code and faster execution.&amp;nbsp; For such types of course the property tester is unnecessary (fields &amp;quot;work&amp;quot; by definition) but the protection the ConstructorTester
 provides would still be useful.&amp;nbsp; So, it'd be nice if ConstructorTester verified that all parameters correspond to
&lt;em&gt;either&lt;/em&gt; a property &lt;em&gt;or&lt;/em&gt; a public field and that that field is appropriately set.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I realize you're just maintaining this as a matter of fun, professional pride, or altriusm and probably don't have time to fullfil every feature request - thanks for the library as-is in any case!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Cheers,&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Eamon Nerbonne&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;</description><author>emn13</author><pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2011 10:12:59 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">New Post: A few feature requests/documentation issues 20110121101259A</guid></item><item><title>NEW POST: Problem with DateTime property</title><link>http://www.codeplex.com/classtester/Thread/View.aspx?ThreadId=20066</link><description>&lt;div class="wikidoc"&gt;
I figured it out: the miliseconds are not preserved in my class. I guess I'll simply ignore this property.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;</description><author>Jericho</author><pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:21:12 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">NEW POST: Problem with DateTime property 20080107092112P</guid></item><item><title>NEW POST: Problem with DateTime property</title><link>http://www.codeplex.com/classtester/Thread/View.aspx?ThreadId=20066</link><description>&lt;div class="wikidoc"&gt;
When testing one of my classes I am getting an error regarding a DateTime property but the get value and the set value match:&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;Test method WebExApiTest.WebExXmlTypePropertiesTest.TestEventSchedule threw exception:  TheJoyOfCode.QualityTools.PropertyTestException: The get value of the 'StartDate' property on the type 'WebExApi.EventSchedule' did not equal the set value (in: '1/1/0001 12:02:34 AM', out: '1/1/0001 12:02:34 AM').&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;Can anybody examplain why I'm getting an error even though the values appear to be the same?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;</description><author>Jericho</author><pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:47:47 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">NEW POST: Problem with DateTime property 20080107034747P</guid></item><item><title>NEW POST: Contribution</title><link>http://www.codeplex.com/classtester/Thread/View.aspx?ThreadId=17674</link><description>&lt;div class="wikidoc"&gt;
Hi,&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;I would like to send a few patches. I'm using the TortoiseSVN and I'm wondering if this kind of format is what you would accept or maybe there is a different template?&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;</description><author>PawelPabich</author><pubDate>Sat, 10 Nov 2007 18:53:25 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">NEW POST: Contribution 20071110065325P</guid></item></channel></rss>