Random execution order of test cases (shuffle)

[throwtheswitch]

Random execution order of test cases (shuffle)

[sw17ch]

I like this idea a lot and would be happy to get a pull request with this goal accepted.

I've implemented this "random execution order of test cases" feature on my fork and I'm going to submit this pull request very soon.

[barneywilliams]

Can your implementation be fed with a seed to reproduce a "randomized"
sequence verbatim? That is definitely necessary for this to be a
responsible addition.

Thanks much for contributing! This will definitely be a good addition to
the framework. We have discovered many initialization issues, both in tests
and production code via randomization.

Cheers,
Greg

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 6:04 AM, pbhar [email protected] wrote:

I've implemented this "random execution order of test cases" feature on my
fork and I'm going to submit this pull request very soon.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/2#issuecomment-14767140
.

[jamestiotio]

Hi folks, I stumbled upon this issue while trying to check whether Unity supports this shuffled random execution order of tests or not. This issue was closed as completed by @mvandervoord, but as far as I am aware, I do not think Unity supports this feature yet, and there are no corresponding relevant pull requests or commits linked to this issue that introduced this feature into Unity.

Can I confirm whether this feature has been added to Unity or not? If yes, can I ask how to activate it (and perhaps add those steps to the docs)? If not, then I am willing to raise a PR to add this feature, including adding the aforementioned possibility of using a seed for deterministic reproduction.

Thanks!

[mvandervoord]

This was previously supported in the test runner generator, but was long ago removed from it. I'd be interested in seeing this feature reintroduced in a clean way. :)

[jamestiotio]

This was previously supported in the test runner generator, but was long ago removed from it.

Ah alright then.

I'd be interested in seeing this feature reintroduced in a clean way. :)

Sure thing, I will work on this whenever I manage to get around to it.