Feature Requests

I suggest you ...

(thinking…)

Enter your idea and we'll search to see if someone has already suggested it.

If a similar idea already exists, you can support and comment on it.

If it doesn't exist, you can post your idea so others can support it.

Enter your idea and we'll search to see if someone has already suggested it.

  1. Allow for easy command-line installation (e.g. Chocolatey)

    Our development machines are built via PowerShell script, which is a very flexible and maintainable way of scaling to many developers. The scripts rely heavily on Chocolatey packages to install software, but unfortunately the unofficial Chocolatey package for the NCrunch Visual Studio plugin is not reliably updated and does not cope well with upgrades. Also, there is no command-line NCrunch package.

    Given that Chocolatey packages are relatively simple wrappers around the existing product installers, it would be great if you could work with the existing package maintainer to improve the existing package, and create a package for the command-line application.

    6 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  2. A more obvious colour of the coverage markers to show a build error

    When working in code, test or otherwise I would like more obvious feedback for when a build has failed as I often mistake the dull green of a previously passing test with a failed build for the normal passing green.

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  3. Gated Check In Support

    It would be great if Ncrunch provided an optional gate for check-ins when there are failing unit tests. Check-ins to version control systems would fail and display failing tests.

    This would be helpful for long-running unit test builds, so that the work could be offloaded from a central build server to incremental runs on everyone's dev machine.

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  4. Support Expecto

    It would be great if NCrunch could integrate with Expecto (https://github.com/haf/expecto).

    8 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  5. Shortcut to run only failed tests

    Sometime I fix an issue for a failing test where NCrunch cannot detect the test is impacted.
    Instead of running all pinned tests I would like to bind a shortcut to only run failing tests (Similar to vstudio's TestExplorer.RunFailedTests) to verify the fix quickly.

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  6. Allow an ignored test to be run manually

    When a test is ignored either allow it to be run manually or disable the "Run selected test in new task runner process" in the popup menu in "NCrunch Tests" window.
    Right now you can click the item in the popup menu but the test is not run.
    Preferably I would rather be able to run the test on demand.

    3 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  7. 2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  8. Show what it the currect engine mode on "NCrunch Test" screen or maybe via some icon in the VS status bar.

    Why?
    I often switch between modes like this:
    Run all tests automatically -> Run all tests manually or Run pinned test automatically -> Run all tests automatically
    This is due to make sure NCrunch does not get into the way by running tests that at the moment are doing more harm than good.

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  9. Test Coverage Analysis by Specific Test Class

    I suggest to make possible to change the way code coverage is calculated.
    While I am developing I do not do much end-to-end testing. What I do is purely unit testing as part of my TDD process. I would like to have the code coverage calculated class by test class.
    Example case: Class "Car" being tested by class "CarUnitTests". I would like to have the code coverage of class "Car" being calculated exclusively by the tests present in "CarUnitTests".

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  10. Standalone UI which can be used with every other IDE

    Here are some feature requests for Visual Studio Code and Rider. But these require deep Integration.

    But since VS 2017 sucks so much these days. It would be nice if we can use another IDE.

    I propose a standalone Version with the NCrunch with the UI and Windows which are currently in Visual Studio. But without Visual Studio.

    Of course this is not such a tight integration with the IDEs (not jumping to the code, debug and break into failing tests etc.) but would be a good start. And of course, it is only running tests on save because of…

    11 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  11. An option to automatically pin *modified* tests

    Most of the time, I only want to automatically run tests that I'm working on.

    So I use engine mode "Run pinned tests automatically, others manually". And manually pin tests I'm working on.

    Would be nice if NCrunch could automatically pin modified tests (detect changes of test methods and test classes), and automatically pin modified tests.

    I know we already have an option "Automatically pin newly discovered tests". Would be nice if there was another option "Automatically pin modified tests".

    3 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  12. Attribute to identify type/methods that must have 100% code coverage

    It would be helpful to have NCrunch treat (or at least report) decreases in code coverage as "fail".

    For example, supporting an attribute that marks a project/class/method as "100% code coverage required".

    Or a larger flag such that any code coverage drop is a "failure". This would be a bit trickier to support as it may need to be include a way to identify a baseline. And it may be helpful to distinguish between coverage for old code vs coverage for new code.

    I think starting with a numeric attribute indicating the required coverage would give the biggest ROI --…

    2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  13. "first failing test"

    I suggest you include the option to highlight the first failing test in the "NCrunch Tests" window and display the details.

    Right now when there are no tests failing and a test fails, I have to click on it in order to see the details of why.

    Having it automatically show the details would be very helpful and save a few clicks.

    6 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  14. Test results formatting

    Currently the test results appear as a block of text within the "NCrunch Tests" window. When compared to the built in display of test results in TestExplorer (im using VS2017), it feels rather raw and perhaps could be improved.

    Im not saying to get rid of the raw text output (we all have our preferences), but to have an option to format the display of results to allow the result of a test to be clear and distinct from the full result text. So, instead of:

    Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting.AssertFailedException: Assert.AreEqual failed. Expected:<2>. Actual:<1>. Some random failure description i typed in as the…

    2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  15. Client priority setting for use by node servers

    We're looking into setting up an NCrunch node farm. This would be used by developer machines but it would also be used by the build server. When the build server goes to run tests, we'd like to have those test tasks take execution priority over test tasks coming from dev machines. Is this possible?

    From Remco: Presently it isn't possible to control this. The grid nodes operate on a round-robin type request system that treats every connected client equally. The only way to ensure priority for the build server given NCrunch's current feature set would be to set aside nodes…

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  16. In Test window, Server column for grouping rows should include all servers for children (not just one of them).

    In my case Server always says "(Local)" if any child test ran locally. I think this should be a comma-delimited list like Category. Next best thing would be leaving it blank.

    If I'm filtering for failed tests only, the current behavior is really a bug, because all of the failing tests may have ran on one node server that isn't (local), yet the grouping row alone still says (local). So it makes scanning the server column to troubleshoot issues (in this case node server dependency config issues) confusing.

    0 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  17. Add AlwaysImpactedAttribute for Run Impacted Tests Automatically mode

    It would be useful if there was an AlwaysImpactedAttribute that could be attached to a test method so that it always executes when a code change is made.

    The use case I am thinking of occurs with Automapper. We have a test that executes AssertConfigurationIsValid(), but when the engine mode is in "Run Impacted Tests Automatically" NCrunch will not detect that this test needs to be run whenever we make changes to the models in the solution.

    If I could put an attribute on that test method that says 'always run', I could continue to use the "impacted only" engine…

    2 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    4 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  18. Support for debugging with the 'Microsoft Child Process Debugging Power Tool'

    When debugging tests with NCrunch the 'Microsoft Child Process Debugging Power Tool' (https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=GreggMiskelly.MicrosoftChildProcessDebuggingPowerTool) does not work.

    Maybe this can be fixed.

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  19. Introduce NCrunch.TestContext or similar to get info of current running test, e.g. attributes

    Original thread: http://forum.ncrunch.net/yaf_postst2127_NCrunch-attributes-on-interface.aspx

    I would like a way, in similar to NUnit\s TestContext, to read information about current running test.

    One piece of information I would like is attributes like [ExclusivelyUses]; In a complex test setup I might share test logic for multiple tests, and then it would be good to ensure that the proper attributes are applied on the tests to e.g. avoid deadlocks, or ensure an integration test has [ExclusivelyUeses("IntegrationTest")] attribute set etc.

    1 vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  20. Add PriorityAttribute: This can Improve parallel execution dramatically

    The tests are ordered for execution depending on automatic generated priorities.

    Execution of an isolated test (e.g. needing exclusively the "Task Runner" Resource) causes that no new tests are put into the Pipeline (local and grid node) until this test is started.

    If I could set the PriorityAttribute to all isolated tests, I could run them all together at the end rather then often interrupting the Pipeline that contains many long running tests.

    4 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: facebook google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  • Don't see your idea?

Feature Requests

Feedback and Knowledge Base