-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
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
Should ExecutableInvoker#invoke(Method, Object) run all extensions ? #3014
Comments
I'm not quite sure what you mean by "applicable". So, yes, please expound with concrete use cases. |
By applicable, I meant extensions which makes sense in the context of a test method execution (mainly BeforeEach & AfterEach ones). The same way BeforeAll extensions may be expected to be executed by My case is to be able to re-run all extensions with a different classpath. The code of my experimentations can be found here if needed https://github.com/fridujo/classpath-junit-extension/blob/feature/extension_composition/src/main/java/com/github/fridujo/classpath/junit/extension/jupiter/AbstractClasspathExtension.java#L89-L102 As I see it, to go further down the path of supplying bits of the execution part of the framework, either
I am not sure it makes sense TBH. |
Team Decision: We think the use case you outline in your extension is very interesting and think we should provide dedicated extension APIs to replace the classloader for a certain test classes or methods. The long-standing issue #201 is probably too abstract for that. Could you please raise a new dedicated feature request for your use case? |
Providing dedicated |
@marcphilipp , I tried to summarize the idea in #3028 Do not hesitate to modify the content if you feel that is necessary. |
Hello 👋
Toying around with the new extension point
ExecutableInvoker
, I figured thatExecutableInvoker#invoke(Method, Object)
does only runParameterResolver
s.Should it not run all extensions applicable ?
My reasoning is the following:
ParameterResolver
extensions are executed, but the others are not, may the test not be in an inconsistent state ?I can provide more utilization context if needed.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: