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. cover

    When collapsing a method have another icon next to it indicating the coverage.

    It can have 5 colors:
    Black - no cover
    Green - 100% covering tests. All tests pass
    Red - 100% covering tests with at least one failing test
    Blue - Contains some passing tests but also there are lines of code that are not covered by tests
    Orange - Contains some failing tests but also there are lines of code that are not covered by tests

    2 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. Allow a test project to be excluded from creating inline code coverage

    Inline code coverage is great for unit tests, but when integration tests are also instrumented we lose the granularity of coverage.

    N.B Our integration tests are for testing the interaction of our classes either with each other, or 3rd party libraries. So running them in ncrunch and getting test failure notifications straight away is useful for us.

    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 →
  3. 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. 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 →
  5. Support more than one workspace base path

    I'm using a RAM-drive as my workspace base path and it often gets full (see complementary feature request here: https://ncrunch.uservoice.com/forums/245203-feature-requests/suggestions/6673500-cleanup-of-workspace). It would be nice to have a fallback solution so that when the target drive is full, it doesn't block the whole building process. This fallback solution could be the %temp%. I guess the best would be to try all workspaces in order.

    So for example, in my case the workspace base path would be:
    d:\;%temp%

    2 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 →
  6. Create a 'Kill Currently Running Tests and Execute Selected Tests Immediately' button

    The existing 'Run selected test(s) in new process' button just gives the selected tests high priority. This is very irritating when longer running tests are clogging the queue. I often go to the Processing Queue to kill the tests I don't care about so that my test will start sooner. Worse, sometimes the test I want runs together with long tests I don't want, so I can't kill just the long tests without removing my requested test as well. Just run my test, right now! The others can wait.

    7 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. Support IntelliTrace when debugging tests

    At the moment I am unable to make use of IntelliTrace when debugging tests using the NCrunch test runner.

    I use IntelliTrace frequently while debugging, and find it especially useful when I want to look into ADO.Net calls from ORMs.

    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 →
  8. Add a performance view (or data export) to help find performance bottlenecks

    Give us access to the line-by-line performance/execution times data.
    I'd love to have it as a single view or even just a data export, so I can easily identify bottlenecks in my code.

    45 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 →
  9. Cleanup of workspace

    For faster unit-testing, I am using a RAM-drive as workspace, with 4GB space.

    NCrunch keeps all old build artifacts around until they are no longer needed. In practice, this means that as I am working, the workspace keeps on filling up, since a change in one place which doesn't impact something else means both versions are kept in the workspace.

    As a result of this, the 4GB quickly get gobbled up, forcing me to cleanup by deactivating/activating NCrunch (which means everything gets rebuilt, even though this isn't necessary) or manually trying to delete as much as possible in the filesystem.

    8 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 →
  10. Option to Build and Start Running Test Only on File Saves

    It would helpful to have an option where NCrunch does not start building the project and running tests until after I save the file. We've had some issues with this in a project I was on that had several thousand unit tests. This would be similar to the way Karma's auto-file watcher works for JavaScript unit testing.

    I'm aware of the sliding building delay - and it can help - but I feel it'd be better to just provide an option to not start processing until I save a file.

    43 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    6 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  11. Add the ExclusivelyUses attribute to the NCrunchConfiguration settings as an alternative to using the attribute.

    If you could control the ExclusivelyUses values for a test, project, or assembly from the NCrunch configuration settings as well as using the attribute, the projects and solutions would not need references to the NCrunch.Framework.dll. So, for teams where only some developers are using NCurnch, the settings are kept for that user.

    3 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 →
  12. Show code coverage metric in the status bar next to "N"

    It would save a few clicks when code coverage would be displayed in the status bar next to "N" or instead of green "N".
    Besides, it would be a constant reminder of the current Code Coverage before the commits.

    12 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 →
  13. xUnit tests search: take into account attributes derived from [Fact]

    xUnit tests search: take into account attributes derived from [Fact]

    *Details*

    xUnit allows to extend its functionality by deriving from [Fact] attribute, e.g. is allows to generate test case parameters by using such approach. It even has OOTB [Theory] attribute which is derived from [Fact] (see https://github.com/paulecoyote/xunit/blob/master/Main/xunit.extensions/DataTheories/TheoryAttribute.cs).

    The problem is that NCrunch does not "see" tests marked by attributes derived from [Fact] (e.g. [Theory]) unless you explicitly have at least one "Fact" test in your test assembly.

    2 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. Add coverage aggregates to the xml report produced by the console runner

    The output of the console runner contains HTML and raw xml reports.

    The HTML report is nice, however the contents of the XML files is a bit too detailed to get statistics from it.

    It would be nice to have the same kind of data that is in the HTML file but in XML form (meaning, the % coverage per method/class/assembly/global). Something similar to the DotCover XML or JSON reports. In fact if the format was exactly the same as the dotcover reports we could leverage tools that can already process these files, like SonarQube.

    6 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 →
  15. Add a console runner nuget package

    A console runner package would make integration in build systems simpler.

    The would be no need to install the runner on each agent, just get the package from nuget and run it.

    7 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 →
  16. The ability to mass-unpin tests

    NCrunch is great, but there is one annoying thing in the GUI - there is no option to unpin (and pin) tests by right-clicking on the whole namespace (or even root namespace). You can only pin/unpin individual test methods or test classes.

    6 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 →
  17. Allow the console tool to be run continuously

    Im super happy with ncrunch console tool that was just released:

    http://www.ncrunch.net/documentation/tools_console-tool

    However i would also like it to be able to run as a deamon continuously watching a specified folder/solution using NCrunch excellent incremental build/test features.

    Ideally it would output a maximum of N failing tests:

    1: *. [NameSpace].Test failed | at line 12 of filename.
    2: ....

    Ideally it would also support verbose output in json/xml so that plugins for other editors can be written.

    16 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 →
  18. Provide history of failed tests

    When working on a project where NCrunch is running (all) the tests automatically in the background, some tests occassionally fail and then suddenly pass.

    I would like to have some kind of history for failed tests so that I can even later on delve further into the failed tests to figure out what's going wrong.

    In addition it would be nice to be able to configure the time span (or number of tests runs) for that historical data to limit the memory consumed (I could imagine that using that feature on large projects will have a significant memory impact).

    6 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    3 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  19. Provide a smoother upgrade path for Grid Node Server - (backwards) compatability or run in parallel.

    At the moment, the grid node servers must be updated at the same time as all VS clients.

    Either allow mismatched versions of NCrunch in VS and distributed nodes, or allow multiple instances of the grid node server on the same machine.

    This is holding back our adoption of v2.8 - whether we install the server first or ask developers to upgrade their client first, we have a period where nobody has distributed processing.

    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 →
  20. Allow navigation to test in test window

    From the test status gutter or test name, I would like to be able to navigate to the test (right click or hotkey) in the test status window so that I can quickly ignore/unignore all tests in a test class easily.

    5 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 →
  • Don't see your idea?

Feature Requests

Feedback and Knowledge Base