robotframework
For loops with multiple values should be split into separate rows
Originally submitted to Google Code by Marcin.Koperski on 3 Feb 2011
Incorrect presentation arguments for method ':For' using multiple variables. After reload data are put in single row which makes reading data impossible.
Ride change presentation of variables, even when in file data are stored correctly (INFO.TXT) contains source to TC.
Tested on RIDE 0.32.1
Originally submitted to Google Code by @pekkaklarck on 3 Feb 2011
The underlying problem is that RIDE loses source formatting when it gets the data from Robot's internal modules. This is a known limitation we aren't planning to do anything in the foreseeable future.
In this particular case RIDE could format the for loop better, though. It could probably show one set of variables in one row, just like in your original source, always when there are more than one loop variables. When done like this it would format for loops nicely regardless the original formatting.
It would be nice to get this into 1.0 (whenever that is) but don't consider this too high priority. Patches with implementation and tests are accepted.
Originally submitted to Google Code by @pekkaklarck on 3 Feb 2011
I just looked at your after image again and realized that all values are in one row. I though RIDE would split them to separate rows at some point, but apparently that happens only when the data is saved. Having all values in one row is kind-of a different issue than not splitting values nicely when there are multiple loop variables but it's probably fine to cover both of them in this issue. I raise the priority a bit anyway.
The real problem here is that for loops are already now pretty hard to handle in RIDE. Splitting values into multiple rows would probably make that even harder.
Originally submitted to Google Code by Marcin.Koperski on 3 Feb 2011
In Info.txt you can see that TC contain information that should be enough to split it properly, since every row of variables have '...' on the begin of each line.
Originally submitted to Google Code by @jussimalinen on 14 Aug 2012
Would be nice, but I am descoping this to future.