TUnit - Wrong source reference in Test Explorer

[fredrikeriksson]

Reqnroll Version

3.1.1

Which test runner are you using?

MSTest

Test Runner Version Number

TUnit 0.61.58

.NET Implementation

.NET 9.0

Test Execution Method

Visual Studio Test Explorer

Content of reqnroll.json configuration file

No response

Issue Description

TUnit integration produce source references for Test Explorer so it refers the feature code behind file.
Because of this one can't navigate to the feature file from Test Explorer but instead opens the code behind file.

Source also works as intended for pure TUnit tests (as far as I've seen)

Steps to Reproduce

Install Reqnroll.TUnit, compile.

Rolling back to MSTest for example works as intended right away.

Link to Repro Project

No response

[gasparnagy]

I can reproduce the issue, but the source reference in the test explorer is provided by the test runner itself, Reqnroll is not involved with that. We just generate the test method with the necessary #line pragmas to map the code lines to the feature file lines.
Could you ask the TUnit team about their opinion?

[thomhurst]

I've not seen or used pragma lines before - How do they work?

TUnit populates the data via the compiler from the [TestAttribute] - There's two hidden compiler generated arguments for it, Path and LineNumber.

I believe you source gen your own code don't you? So could you source gen these arguments into the test attribute like

[Test("MyPath", 50)] ?

[gasparnagy]

@thomhurst I have no idea how the other frameworks detect the source information. The pragmas we generate are ensuring that the debug source info of the test method will be set to the appropriate feature line. But I don't know if the frameworks get this from the stack trace or by query the assembly Metadata.

Reqnroll could provide the source information to the source and line parameters of the TUnit Test attribute, that's relatively easy, but the question is if this should be the way to go (for TUnit). Using the debug source info would then work automatically for anyone who generates test classes.

Let us know which way you want to go.

[thomhurst]

Are you talking about the pragma lines again? I'm not even sure if source generators can access though via Roslyn syntax. I think it'd be easier to just populate TestAttribute arguments

[gasparnagy]

Ok. Then we should populate the attribute parameters.

[fredrikeriksson]

Just to add another semi out of scope idea, it would also be nice if clicking on a test derived from examples navigates to the corresponding example.

Unsure if this is the behaviour with other integrations... :)

[gasparnagy]

Just to add another semi out of scope idea, it would also be nice if clicking on a test derived from examples navigates to the corresponding example.

Unsure if this is the behaviour with other integrations... :)

Yes, if we anyway do the linking ourselves, we should do it as you say. The other integrations take the method debug info, so they just jump to the scenario header, but for those we don't have a better option.

@fredrikeriksson If you are in the context, would you be up to try to implement this? 😉

[gasparnagy]

Upgrading to TUnit v0.67.10 or later fixed the issue.