Add support for Rule Backgrounds.

[clrudolphi]

This PR adds support for Rule Backgrounds.

Most of the additional logic has been added to the ScenarioPartHelper class:

• logic to examine the Feature AST for Rules that have Backgrounds and generate the statement codes for each.
• logic to identify which rule (if any) a given scenario belongs to (during scenario generation to find out which, if any, rule background steps to include)
• The UnitTestMethodGenerator is modified to include the relevant rule background statements in the scenario

Types of changes

• [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue).
• [X ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality).
• [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected).
• [ ] Performance improvement
• [ ] Refactoring (so no functional change)
• [ ] Other (docs, build config, etc)

Checklist:

• [X ] I've added tests for my code. (most of the time mandatory)
• [X ] I have added an entry to the changelog. (mandatory)
• [ ] My change requires a change to the documentation.
• [ ] I have updated the documentation accordingly.

[clrudolphi]

Open to suggestions for improvements. I will be adding tests to the Specs project. Considering adding a dedicated unit test project for this -- let me know whether you think that worthwhile.

[clrudolphi]

@gasparnagy Thank you so much for the review comments and suggestions! I've incorporated your suggestions, resulting in a greatly simplified implementation (largely isolated to the SPH). Would welcome any further suggestions you might have.

I am having a problem with adding a Feature file to the SpecFlow.Specs tests however. Pls see my latest commit to this PR (#565afff). When executed the test fails with a TechTalk.SpecFlow.BindingException "Ambiguous step definitions..." The exact error message related to the first scenario of the feature file is: Error Message: TechTalk.SpecFlow.BindingException : Ambiguous step definitions found for step 'Given something first as background': DefaultTestProject:RuleSteps1.GivenSomethingFirst(), DefaultTestProject:BindingsClass_76ec255a.StepBinding() Stack Trace: at TechTalk.SpecFlow.Infrastructure.TestExecutionEngine.GetStepMatch(StepInstance stepInstance)

Any suggestions?

[clrudolphi]

@gasparnagy never mind on the problem with ambiguous step definitions; I figured it out. My problem :).

This PR ready for final review/approval.

[clrudolphi]

Please remove that one scenario and then we are ready to go, i think.

Removed. This feature file now reverted to what is in Master.

[clrudolphi]

@gasparnagy @SabotageAndi - checking in with you on this. I believe all prior suggestions/concerns are addressed. Are there any other changes you would like to see?

[gasparnagy]

@clrudolphi Thx! It took a bit more time... sry

[praticandobdd]

@SabotageAndi great news! awesome feature! Congrats.

[GondilOndro]

Has this already been released? Can't see it working in latest SpecFlow for Visual Studio 2022 released Dec 20 2022

[clrudolphi]

Has this already been released? Can't see it working in latest SpecFlow for Visual Studio 2022 released Dec 20 2022

It was incorporated into the v4.0.31-beta build (built on 15 Dec 22).