-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 325
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Console output for minimal and quiet #2191
Console output for minimal and quiet #2191
Conversation
@adamralph Can you please review the change? I have attached the screenshot too. |
@hvinett I assume this addresses #1836? I don't have the bandwidth to review the diff, but the results look good. I just have two comments:
|
Oh, two more things:
Taking all my comments into consideration, I would like to see this:
|
@hvinett Can you please take into consideration the feedback shared by @adamralph and push the changes. |
if (summary.FailedTests > 0) | ||
{ | ||
// Failed! Pass {1} Failed {2} skipped {3} Time : 233 se ({4}) | ||
Output.Information(false, ConsoleColor.Red, string.Format(CultureInfo.CurrentCulture, CommandLineResources.TestRunSummaryFailed, summary.TotalTests, summary.PassedTests, summary.FailedTests, summary.SkippedTests, GetFormattedDurationString(summary.TimeSpan), sd.Key.Split('\\').Last(), targetFramework)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
- What happens when target framework is not there? Do we always have a target framework?
- Directly appending target framework will append the full name of target framework. eg: .NetCoreApp, Version 3.0.
Do we want to consider appending short folder name (netcoreapp3.0) as suggested by @adamralph ?
cc: @singhsarab
This seems to be progressing nicely! My current feedback:
Again, taking all my points into account, I'd like to see:
|
Removed the empty line that was removed previously in #2039 |
Hmm, since the minimal is the default, and Normal shows the passed tests, this should really affect just the Quiet output. But I would expect quiet to be, well, quiet. But since this was approved above I am just going to go with it, because I see no other option, that would not be a breaking change. |
It looks like some great progress has been made here! Can we please update the issue description to show the final rendering and make it clear at what levels this output will be shown? Specifically, I would expect
I would expect |
I would expect the same, but the problem is that Minimal is the default output, and changing the default is always problematic. :/ |
But that's exactly what happened in #1836, when the default was changed from single line to multi-line. Now we have an opportunity to change it back again. |
I am more concerned about not being able to see which tests actually failed. Because this output does not report the tests anymore, just the per-source summary. |
OK, then I misunderstood the current proposal. To summarise what I would like to see:
|
Aaah okay, reverting back to where I was and just adding the failed results reporting. That is why it was writing the summary after the whole run. not after every assembly. Could have saved myself a lot of work if this would have become clearer before :) |
@nohwnd would it be possible to get an up-to-date screenshot which shows the current output from this PR? I'm finding it difficult to infer from the various changes that are being pushed. |
41927b6
to
54aca6f
Compare
Thanks @nohwnd. ☝️ I assume ☝️ Can we please remove these lines from minimal output? |
Yes, --nologo will remove those lines. Removing those lines would be more difficult because the logger parses the verbosity, but in this case the runner is what writes those two lines, and they are also a nice indication that something happens. So I'd rather keep it to get his finally merged. |
You are right I reverted to the point where it worked basically as it should, added the change for removing the new line again. Now it should be gone. |
Thanks for the latest screenshots @nohwnd. It's really good to see how the output is progressing. One observation I have is that the blank line usage seems to be a bit inconsistent:
Perhaps it's worth doing a full assessment of where blank lines are used and are not used, in order to align everything? As I mentioned, my chief concern is
|
That output is coming from approximately 3 places in quite random order, especially in the abort case, there we have output from console logger, collector logger, and blame logger. Sadly that is how the architecture is done. I also don't like the output in the abort cases, it looks messy, but there is not much I can do about it. |
🎉 great to see this merged! Is there a rough timeline for 16.8? |
Description
modified printing level in verbosity level is quiet
##issue
1836