Fix issue #128

[sjieg]

This fix should also be committed to version 1.5.0

Summary

See issue #128 for all reproduction information.

How Has This Been Tested?

I've run multiple scenario's locally. All data still seems to be correct and now the line number for Scenario Outlines are fixed.

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)

Checklist:

• I've added tests for my code
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.

[mattwynne]

Well done for finding the fix @sjieg!

We will need a test to accept this patch though. You could try https://github.com/cucumber/cucumber-ruby-core/blob/master/spec/cucumber/core/ast/outline_step_spec.rb though it's quite low-level. There might be some higher-level integration tests somewhere that would be a better place to test it, but I don't have time to look for you right now.

[sjieg]

Thanks @mattwynne.

I believe the test should be added in https://github.com/cucumber/cucumber-ruby-core/blob/master/spec/cucumber/core/compiler_spec.rb . Because it's compiler that expects the correct outline_step data to be returned to it.

compiler_spec.rb:114

  expect( visitor.test_case.location ).not_to eq visitor.test_step.location

Maybe something like this, but I have little experience writing these kind of test cases. (Gherkin/Cucumber all the way here)

Anyway, thanks for the response, let me know if there is anything else I can do to help.

[brasmusson]

This will no doubt break formatter specs in Cucumber-Ruby, they could be updated, but it may also break behaviour we want to keep.

[brasmusson]

This PR cannot be merged (merge conflicts aside) because

• if it would 5 rspec examples and 13 feature scenarios of https://github.com/cucumber/cucumber-ruby starts to fail. So a PR for https://github.com/cucumber/cucumber-ruby that when merged when this PR would be merged, the test of https://github.com/cucumber/cucumber-ruby passes.

• Even though several of the instances of behavior changes of https://github.com/cucumber/cucumber-ruby are intentional (as the data produced by the Json formatter), this PR also breaks the outline.feature which should not change. Of course I am biased about this since I implemented that behavior, but I do believe that the stack trace should look like that (when read from the bottom); "from the outline step at line 6 Given <state> without a table, when it is expanded by the example row at line 12 to Given failing without a table, then the step definition /^failing without a table$/ is called, and that step definition failed".

I do not think there is a simple fix for #128, I think that the expanded step needs to know both the line of the outline step and the line of the example row, and be able to provide each of these to other classes requiring one or the other. It it quite likely that it when quacking like a step should return the outline step location, but it need also be able to provide the specific location, for outline step or example row, when asked for it.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in a week if no further activity occurs.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically closed because of inactivity. You can support the Cucumber core team on opencollective.

[lock]

This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.