Steven Weerdenburg
Steven Weerdenburg
Ah yes, user specified test names. Thank you for calling that out @CharliePoole
This is an interesting idea. I had recently been looking at ways of converting `Assert.Throws` syntax into equivalent constraint-based methods for the similar purpose of inspecting this property. Something like...
I agree this might be be nice to have a thread-localized or thread-safe multiple scope context. Though I would also suggest that if something weren't thread-safe then it better to...
Ah, I see! Thanks for showing an example. It looks like the test is itself testing that something can succeed when run in parallel. That is a good point too...
I think another important point here is that, previously, the lack of thread safety in a multiple scope would only be visible in a failure case. Now, our disposal checks...
Perhaps enhancement then? My thinking was that most asserts are thread safe, but the original design of Assert.Multiple() wasn't. It would be nice if that inconsistency were fixed so that...
I agree this should be fixed. The way we expect these "scopes" to work is that the entirety of the work is done within a single method (or callback). A...
Agreed! Makes sense. Thanks for noticing @OsirisTerje
Labeling this as a good first issue. An example of how we did this for net 8 is here: https://github.com/nunit/nunit/issues/4503
@PicNet If you are only seeing that issue in the console runner then it may be an issue specific to how it hosts processes for that particular target runtime. Would...