AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website)

My feedback

  1. 45 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    6 comments  ·  Feature Requests  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website) commented  · 

    Where were these temporary files located? What you've described isn't normal behaviour for NCrunch - it seems like something is going very wrong in your environment. Feel free to post more details in the support forum if you'd like to some help in troubleshooting.

  2. 39 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    5 comments  ·  Feature Requests  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website) commented  · 

    At the moment there are no plans yet to support this directly with NCrunch, but there are plans to introduce an API that should make a 3rd party adapter possible (if someone wishes to write one).

  3. 2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Feature Requests  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website) commented  · 

    This should actually be possible already. Right now the default hotkey for this command is Ctrl+M, B.

    As the command list available under the VS keyboard settings, you can technically bind it to anything you want. Even F5 :)

  4. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Feature Requests  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website) commented  · 

    NCrunch is already militant with its error handling and separation from VS. A big feature introduced early this year was the ability to run the engine outside the VS process (enabled by default through the 'Engine hosting strategy' global configuration setting).

    At the moment the only known way in which NCrunch can cause the VS process to crash is through resource utilisation. Have you been able to exact any useful information about the crashes when these appear? Does devenv.exe spike in memory utilisation? Is there any chance of getting a stack trace when the process goes down?

  5. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Feature Requests  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website) commented  · 

    According to the design of the processing queue, NCrunch should already be doing this.

    There is no cross-dependency between the local build/test tasks or the remote ones inside the processing queue.

    Note that NCrunch can't transfer build artifacts across the grid. This means that the node will still need to build its own projects before it is able to run tests.

    Try adjusting the filters in the Processing Queue Window to see what is causing the grid nodes to delay processing. If an answer to this doesn't present itself, you're welcome to raise it as a support issue and I'll help with further troubleshooting.

  6. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    3 comments  ·  Feature Requests  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website) commented  · 

    See here for a description of what Engine modes are - http://www.ncrunch.net/documentation/concepts_engine-modes

  7. 32 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    4 comments  ·  Feature Requests  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website) commented  · 

    No plans to implement this at the moment. It's a gigantic piece of work, and at the moment seems to be in lower demand than Javascript support (which is relatively easier to implement and maintain).

  8. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    1 comment  ·  Feature Requests  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website) commented  · 

    It's also possible to declare the ExclusivelyUsesAttribute within your own code, and reference it from there. As long as the signature is the same as the one specified here - http://www.ncrunch.net/documentation/reference_runtime-framework_exclusively-uses-attribute .. NCrunch will then detect the new attribute and use it accordingly. This means you don't need to have a reference to NCrunch.Framework.

    I'm not sure if knowledge of this affects the intention behind this feature request, but I thought it would be useful background information.

  9. 9 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    4 comments  ·  Feature Requests  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website) commented  · 

    I admit that I'm having trouble visualising exactly what you mean, but it may well be possible to do this from the side of SpecFlow. The '#line' directives written by SpecFlow override the compiler's line numbering system, allowing it to 'pretend' that the lines are represented elsewhere. Assuming its possible to do what you're suggesting by adding more #line directives, then this may be solvable from the SpecFlow side.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website) commented  · 

    Sadly this may very well be impossible to do with NCrunch.

    NCrunch is reliant on debug metadata emitted by the compiler in order to map coverage data to physical lines of code. Where this debug metadata doesn't exist, it isn't possible for NCrunch to tell which 'line' of code was executed.

    It's for this reason that we don't see markers on C# constructs that do not have a line numbered representation in the PDB file (for example, there are no markers sitting next to class or method declarations, despite this being quite heavily requested in the past).

    The only way to get around this problem is by physically parsing source code (i.e. writing the first few steps of a compiler). The expense of such an approach makes it technically infeasible for a tool like NCrunch.

  10. 5 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    2 comments  ·  Feature Requests  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website) commented  · 

    This is, actually, the original intention behind the 'Pin test' option.

    Sometimes tests can't be shown in the Tests Window because they breach the filters present in the window. This is where the pinned tests came in. Of course, the concept has since evolved quite a bit from the original idea .. but pinning a test should automatically select it in the Tests Window.

  11. 3 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    5 comments  ·  Feature Requests  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website) commented  · 

    There should be many ways to introduce this override - we just need to find a place that works well for your solution :)

    It looks like StyleCop has a property that can be used to switch it off. Adding the following property to each of your projects could also do this:

    <PropertyGroup>
    <StyleCopEnabled Condition="$(NCrunch) == '1'">false</StyleCopEnabled>
    </PropertyGroup>

    If you have any target files shared between projects (recommended for large solutions), you could also include this property in one of them to avoid needing to touch every project.

    In theory, this could even be done with the core MS .target files inside the .NET framework, although I don't necessarily recommend it.

    My preference is to avoid having a huge array of specially targeted configuration options for NCrunch. There's already far more than I'd prefer. I'd rather only look at introducing a configuration option to control this if there is high demand for it.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website) commented  · 

    It should be possible to disable build steps such as this using an NCrunch build override.

    For example, if the build step (i.e. StyleCop) is happening as a result of a target file import, you can simply set a condition on this import tag to avoid importing it when running the code under the context of NCrunch.

    i.e.

    <Import Project="$(ProgramFiles)\MSBuild\Microsoft\StyleCop\v4.3\Microsoft.StyleCop.targets" />

    Would become:

    <Import Condition="$(NCrunch) != '1'" Project="$(ProgramFiles)\MSBuild\Microsoft\StyleCop\v4.3\Microsoft.StyleCop.targets" />

    This would disable the StyleCop build logic for NCrunch builds, while leaving it intact for your normal build.

  12. 11 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    4 comments  ·  Feature Requests  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    AdminRemco Mulder (NCrunch Developer, NCrunch Website) commented  · 

    Can anyone give some examples of why they would find this useful? I'm trying to establish if people want this because they find NCrunch's 'Ignored Tests' to be too limited/cumbersome.

2 Next →

Feedback and Knowledge Base