I would be nice if it was possible to opt-in to change behavior of the context menu "Go to selected test" in that way:

With NUnit, one can write:

public static IEnumerable<TestCaseData> MyTestCaseSourceMethodName()
{
// return test cases...
}

[TestCaseSource("MyTestCaseSourceMethodName")]
public void MyTest(int someArgument)
{
// do test...
}

The test case factory method can be an separate (static) class.
In my case, I have a test with several dozens of test cases.

When a test fails, I can easily go to the failing test implementation, but I cannot easily find the culprit test case.

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.

I would like to be able to Churn tests for x seconds/minutes and if it hasn't failed within that time stop churning.

This so after I have fixed a failing test, which I know fails in churn mode within x seconds, I don't want to run "Churn until it fails" but rather set a time period I know should be sufficient to reproduce it.

When I try to connect to an NCrunch grid node and get "NCrunch Client DIsabled" in red text, my first impulse is to troubleshoot. Is it a firewall problem? Bad password? Something else?

Then it clicks...*client*. I don't have NCrunch enabled in my current Visual Studio solution (or maybe I don't even have a solution loaded yet).

Well, obviously NCrunch won't send anything to the node if there's nothing to send. This isn't really an *error*, per se, so I don't think NCrunch should show the message in red in this case.

It would be great if I could get multiple risk/progress bars pointed at different categories of tests. I would like to see (for instance) one risk/progress bar for acceptance, one for integration, and one for unit tests. It would be great if these were full parallel instances - like with their own configuration and everything. For instance, having acceptance tests farmed out to servers makes a lot of sense but all my unit tests should run locally because it takes longer to farm out a batch than to run it.

I often have failing tests in my test window that I want to re-run in existing process (if there is one), e.g. when modifying database the tests are hitting.
Today I must go via RMB->Advanced, rather than just clicking a toolbar button (similar what exists with "run test(s) in new process".

I'd like to be able to see the history of my work session, meaning at the end of the day I'd like to see visually when my code was compiling, when my tests were all green.
The purpose is to be able to identify if I spend a lot of time in those states and try to reduce that time.
It would be useful for self-improvement or coaching.

Two existing requests want hit count:

https://ncrunch.uservoice.com/forums/245203-feature-requests/suggestions/15401490-hits-count-on-coverage-marker-circle

https://ncrunch.uservoice.com/forums/245203-feature-requests/suggestions/6077791-show-number-of-lines-uniquely-covered-by-a-test

, but I think that it would also be great if you could include a first hit order, then from a glance you could see the execution steps through the code (probably by thread in case multiple threads are used) and determine if line A was executed before line B

I would like to select the file I have opened in visual studio, in the metrics window, so I don't manually have to find it by clicking through the project structure.

Background: I have a build failing if metrics is below a threshold for specific files. When this build fails I get a list of file names. Then it is tedious for me to fix this "file by file" since I have no quick way of selecting current file in metrics window to verify my fixes.

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.

As per title. Now doing it with mouse it way too inconvenient.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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".