GuiceBerry should support TestNG

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Currently GuiceBerry can not be executed when using TestNG. TestNG is an
open source unit testing framework created by Cedric Beust. 

It uses annotations to mark a method as a test and supports parameteric
testing. It would be great if GuiceBerry supports this.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by Krishnan...@gmail.com on 30 Jun 2009 at 12:45

[GoogleCodeExporter]

See the JUnit4 issue for background.

The way I'm thinking about it, when I get JUnit4 support, the "main" guiceberry 
class
(what is today GuiceBerryJunit3) will turn out to be quite agnostic of test 
runner
(since JUnit4 tests, like TestNG, do not extend from a base class, or implement 
an
interface). There are 2 things that I will lose when I do that:

1) typesafety on the "setUp" method (since I'll take "Object" rather than 
"TestCase"
as a param). In the case of JUnit4, no big deal, since this won't be "public"
anymore, cuz of the GuiceBerry Test Runner.

2) I won't have a "getName()" method anymore, which would make error messages 
less
clear. I'll likely pass it as a String arg to the setUp method to avoid this

Is there the same concept of a @RunWith in TestNG?

Original comment by zorze...@gmail.com on 1 Jul 2009 at 5:28

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Maybe this can help. http://testng.org/javadocs/org/testng/TestRunner.html

As far as point 2 goes, XmlTest
http://testng.org/javadocs/org/testng/xml/XmlTest.html argument in TestNG 
allows you
to get a test name.

Original comment by Krishnan...@gmail.com on 7 Aug 2009 at 5:16

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I'm happy to announce this is going to be in for the 3.0 release (which will go 
out this week):

http://code.google.com/p/guiceberry/source/detail?r=246

I think it's a bit verbose, but it's totally functional. If you have any idea 
to make it less verbose, let me know...

Original comment by zorze...@gmail.com on 3 Aug 2010 at 4:19

• Changed state: Fixed