locked
How do you use Pex in Visual Studio? Your Input Is Needed! RRS feed

  • General discussion

  • In continuation of our previous thread about licensing questions (http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/pex/thread/52763686-3eb6-47cf-950d-21b2baa07423), we would like to get some input from everyone how you are using Pex, and how you would like to use it.

    Please copy&paste and fill out the questions below.

    1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no
    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other
    3. How many people are in your team?
    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?

    Any other comments are appreciated as well, about the license terms, or required Visual Studio versions.

    Thanks,
    Your Pex team
    Tuesday, September 8, 2009 11:05 PM

All replies

  • Visual Studio
    2008 Professional
    Uno
    Usually use NUnit.
    Had used PEX briefly before. Was trying to use it again. Overall, I like the idea - although It really seems like there could be a window (tabbed document similar to a code window or a form designer window)  that serves as a home page for your test projects.

    The overall experience however has been quite poor for what I'm trying to accomplish.
    My first attempt to create a PEX test failed with the error of (too long a filename) - I clicked the "Submit to Microsoft" in the dialog and this errored with a "Permission denied" and popped up an alert box stating to manually e-mail the error to "email address goes here". I Click okay, The dialog box showing the error message details disappears.

    Second attempt to create the project was successful and after what I thought was a few tad winded dialogs I had something going. However it failed because the class that I was trying to generate tests for was a generic and it did not bother to prompt me whether i wished to provide types for the generic parameters.

    In this case that is forgiveable, for the only reason being that in this case I am abusing generic types, however I still think that this is something PEX should support.
    So i went to my class which inherits from the generic class and i right clicked on it and chose "create pex test stubs".
    Well it seemed like it did stuff but it errored with the EXACT same error above. So apparently it was getting stuck on the prior creation and everything else was hanging up.

    After trying a few more things i finally gave up, deleted the project, then decided maybe i should give it a clean start. So I recreated the project, this time no IO Path too long exception.  I went straight to the inherited class and created my tests. It created the test methods

    However it only generated tests for methods that were implemented in the. My immediate thought was right click in the PEX explorer on the class and look for an option to test base inherited methods. No go.

    It seems that any attempt to re-update PEX stubs or generate new PEX stubs for other classes results in another project created every single time. Right now I have about 5 test projects after deleting another 4-6 prior

    On top of that, after finding the "Generate tests for inherited members" hidden in the settings, removing all method name filters, getting a 7th test project, looking at the methods generated - it did not find any of the inherited methods

    I'm running Visual Studio 2008 service pack 1 with .net 3.5 SP1 (all latest and greatest updates) and I would like to know whether this is "expected behavior"

    To my way of thinking you should associate a single project with a single PEX Test project. Choosing to create  PEX stubs in a class you've prior created test stubs should not request for a new PEX project like it is. It should update the existing test.
    Same with adding new classes within the same project.

    To my way of thinking the "Settings" that hides the option to "Generate tests for inherited members" should be more visible.

    As for moving forward, assuming that there is some weird bug with my version of visual studio
    I would personally like to see a "home page" of sort similar to the way a form designer, xsd designe, code window , etc
    It shows all of your classes, perhaps in a structure very similar to the way Class Designer does.
    There would be dropdowns/type ins that you can use to filter by (filter by names, filter by inherit from, , filter by method names, etc
    then the option to checkmark individual items, or select all with one click. option to easily specify whether inherited members should be generated .
    This home page would also serve as a command centre to run tests, see an overview of which tests were erroring and jump to the results display from there.

    Wednesday, September 9, 2009 4:35 AM
  • Hi,

    1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no
    only (A) from Visual Studio

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other
    (A) Visual Studio Professional

    3. How many people are in your team?
    one

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?
    Mostly using (B) the wizard generated PUTs but sometimes also adding own PUTs.

    Regards,
    Alexander
    Wednesday, September 9, 2009 9:06 AM
  • Hi,
    >> 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no
    Mostly A, but sometimes also B
    I don't know of any other way to use it, so no to C

    >> 2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other
    B.) Team System

    >> 3. How many people are in your team?
    6, but I'm the only one that uses Pex (yet)

    >> 4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?
    Mostly B, generated by the VS interface for the wizard.
    But once I add new functions to my assemblys under test, usaly run Pex on the base Project and let it add the new tests by saving the testresults.
    I also sometimes write Puts, but that's currently rater the exception.
    Once I have Pex generated Puts and tests for them, I will start writing more Puts

    >>Any other comments are appreciated as well, about the license terms, or required Visual Studio versions.
    Well I first tried Pex with VS2008, but since my Project is to big this didn't work very well.
    After that I tried VS2010, which works a lot better (much lesser OOM crashes!)
    I also tried the Commandline Version, but I must say I like the VS Version better, since this one writes the test into generated files that automatically linked to the file with the contained PUTs.

    Regards,
    Alexander Wurzinger
    Wednesday, September 9, 2009 12:12 PM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no
       1a. We use Stubs extensively and find it *very* helpful.
    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? B) Team System 2008
    3. How many people are in your team? Between 4 and 10.
    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?


    Thursday, September 10, 2009 12:09 AM
  • 1. A) From VS
    2. A) Professional
    3. 5 people in our team
    4. Write PUTs.
    Tech, life, family, faith: http://judahgabriel.blogspot.com
    Thursday, September 10, 2009 4:16 AM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already?
    A) From Visual Studio

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? 
    B) Team System

    3. How many people are in your team?
    12

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?
    B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs. Writing PUTs is a time cosuming task for our team :(
    Thursday, September 10, 2009 4:51 AM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no

    - D) no

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other

    - A) Professional

    3. How many people are in your team?

    - 20

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?

    - A) Parameterized Unit Tests



    There are a couple of barriers to entry for my team:

    1. This is an ms research project with no guarantees that it will ever make it out of the research phase (that I know of). It is completely fair and understandable - it is just hard to see a product a) that might never see the light of day b) may have associated costs down the road that I am not yet aware of
    2. Pex (for commercial use at least) requires Visual Studio Team System. The organization I work for does not use this software and due to the cost of the upper-echelon VS systems never will. I'm assuming this is an architectural issue, and if so completely understand it - it just makes it a no-go for our team (and i'm guessing many others).
    Thursday, September 10, 2009 5:16 AM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already?

    - (D) no

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using?

    - (B) Team System

    3. How many people are in your team?

    - 5

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?

    - (A) Parameterized Unit Tests

    MVP Visual Basic
    Thursday, September 10, 2009 7:44 AM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio
    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? B) Team System
    3. How many people are in your team? 5
    4. Only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?

    Someone already mentioned this but it takes some persuasion to have Pex re-use an existing test project when the time comes to go back into the tests after a sprint or two to synchronize the unit tests.  Still hitting 80-90% coverage, very effective tool for achieving code coverage.

    Regards,

    ofc.

    Thursday, September 10, 2009 11:44 AM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no

    D -- much of our code is in C++/CLI and inaccessible from Pex. Please support C++/CLI.

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other

    B

    3. How many people are in your team?

    20

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?

    Would do 4 if possible. See #1.
    Thursday, September 10, 2009 1:24 PM
  • 1. A) for algorithmic types of code.
    2. B)
    3. 2
    4. only A)
    Thursday, September 10, 2009 1:46 PM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already?
    - Yes, from Visual Studio.

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using?
    - Team System (the beta)

    3. How many people are in your team?
    - Just me (personal projects)

    4. Do you write ...
    - I use Pex (in combination with contracts) as a bug-finding tool more than a test-making tool. I have it explore a set of functions, then I review the errors (and sometimes check the return values).
    • Edited by Strilanc Sunday, September 13, 2009 4:36 PM fixing lost linebreaks
    Sunday, September 13, 2009 4:35 PM

  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no
    A)From Visual Studio

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other
    A) 2008 Professional

    3. How many people are in your team?
    There are four .net developers in this location. There are handfuls of .net developers in other subsidiaries and geographical locations working for this company.

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?
    So far, B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs.

    It is difficult enough to convince management here (fortune 500 company) that the handful of .net developers should even have a recurring MSDN professional subscription. We evaluated Team System a year ago and it was decided the cost was unjustifiably too high. There's no way, especially in today's economy and a "it still stings" 30% reduction in our labor force that they'll bite on an incredibly more expensive IDE and/or subscription.

    Pex is a GREAT idea and I'd love to get our team(s) using it (as even in simply evaluating how well it will work has helped me tremendously). That said, if it's decided to only support TFS for commercial use of Pex then it'll never get past my desk. Even an option of making Pex a separately purchased add-in for commercial users stands a far better chance of seeing it used for us than making an IDE we've already said "no" to a prerequisite.
    Tuesday, September 15, 2009 6:54 PM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no

    D

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other

    A

    3. How many people are in your team?

    On my immediate team, around 8.  In our IT department, about 40.

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?

    C) Neither.  We use NUnit, but our unit tests do not use PUT yet.  Our current tools don't support them.  However, from my own testing experience:
    1)  I can see where they could be useful, and
    2)  How a tool like Pex could help plug holes or expose bugs in my own testing.
    Friday, September 18, 2009 3:40 AM
  • Answers Inline

    1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no
    [iconst] No, we are looking for a tool very much like TypeMock that would help you write stubs for any kind of class/method (including non-virtual).
    We would be VERY interested to use this for our internal software.

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other
    [iconst] We are using Visual Studio Professional 2008.

    3. How many people are in your team?
    [iconst] 20 developers

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?
    [iconst] See the answer to the first question.

    Tuesday, September 22, 2009 6:29 PM

  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no
    yes, From vs 2010. i have never used the other options
    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other
    2008 pro, 2010 team system (beta1)
    3. How many people are in your team?
    im the only one that only do code, but  ~4 others code as well as do physical engineering, im the only one using pex
    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?
    i mostly use the wizard generated ones and then modify them.
    Wednesday, September 23, 2009 11:22 AM
  • I would really like to use PEX.

    I've had a look at the licensing and had a brief email conversation with Nikolai to evaluate.  My conclusion is unfortunate.  It's not worth my time and effort to evaluate this remarkable looking tool.  When it gets launched, it may well be locked away from me inside of Team System.

    Here's a few details.

    My question after having a look at the licensing and distributions:

    "I'm interested in testing out PEX.  (I'm currently considering testing inference engines.)

     

    When I look at the licensing it gets too hard.

     

    1)  I see the commercial/non-commercial issue conflated with Team/Pro versions of VS.  I find that pretty annoying.  I'm not using Team and don't expect to.  This suggests that it may only be released for team.  If there is a good chance of that can you let me know.  (It it is team only PEX is not for me.)

     

    2)  The commercial/non-commercial distinction seems illusory to me.  (The situations I think of, including in Academic situations could all be argued both ways.)  My problem is that I can evaluate PEX, find it useful then want to use it in a project that may one day become commercial.  If there are limits on that there is no point in even testing it.  I'm not going to spend resources on legal advice.  Any idea when these ambiguities will be resolved?  (With a time on that I can consider when I might be interested in evaluation.)

     

    The idea looks great.

     

    I hope these encumbrances don't harm development."

    I now believe that it's likely that this will be locked up inside Team System.

    I never expect to use TS, and for good reasons which I won't cover here.  I really long for the old days when Microsoft meant it when it said Developers first.  (Remember Balmer's dance?)

    Now there is a bad case of SKU'itis.  That horrible situation where mental contortions are made to justify artificial product differentiation (which, in this case looks antagonistic to many Visual Studio users).

    I wish you very good luck with what appears to be a truly great product.  (I don't now envisage ever driving it myself.)

    To answer one of your questions.  How do I test.

    I've followed testing for a long time.  I looked at Marc Clifton's original posts on some ideas and was delighted when Peli came up with MBUnit.  (I still use it and performance with the latest version (3.1) is really great.)  My coding had altered a lot over the years.  Now I tend to develop something, get it right, build code generation tools then move on.  My code generation uses, my home grown WinForms app (this has most active material at present), I have also actively tested good old fashioned XSLT and CodeSmith recently and expect to soon properly try out T4 (and maybe integrate it into my own templating tool).

    I have recently turned a corner with tests (a lot of my tests aren't unit tests, they use databases and have "side effects", I find SQL Server CE to be very useful for testing purposes, it's XCopy capable!!).  From now tests will increasingly be created from my XML definitions of projects.  In other words the development process will incorporate "meta test code writing" and less hands on test code writing.  (Test isn't even quite the right word, it's more like "testification" a combination of test and specification.)

    Some parts of my work involve what boil down to mathematical functions.  Code tests have serious limitations, so I produce pictorial graphs of functions (out of my test routines actually) which I inspect and which tell me more in 30 seconds than looking at a hundred little green dots.  (Unless I find a realistic way to use tools to analyse functions and result sets, I may be with this visual test processing for a long time.)

    I hope that's useful to you.

    My best wishes for the PEX project.  May it serve the whole developer community well.

    • Edited by MikeGale Friday, September 25, 2009 12:31 AM Found latest version of Gallio/MBUnit which performs great.
    Wednesday, September 23, 2009 8:36 PM
  • Hi there

    1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional


    3. How many people are in your team?
    one

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs) yet still in practicing



    Best wishes
    Nick
    Friday, October 23, 2009 10:31 PM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already? Both A AND B.  A From Visual Studio on our dev machines AND B. the command-line on our Continuous Integration server. 
    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? B. Team System
    3. How many people are in your team?  Four.
    4. Do you write: B. Only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?  And specifically just the detours for mocking the SharePoint API.


    My blog: http://rapidapplicationdevelopment.blogspot.com/
    Sunday, October 25, 2009 3:37 PM
  • 1. From VS.
    2. VS 2008 Professional.
    3. 5
    4. Right now we're just experimenting, and we've used PUTs.



    Tech, life, family, faith: http://judahgabriel.blogspot.com
    Thursday, November 12, 2009 7:38 PM
  • In continuation of our previous thread about licensing questions (http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/pex/thread/52763686-3eb6-47cf-950d-21b2baa07423 ), we would like to get some input from everyone how you are using Pex, and how you would like to use it.

    Please copy&paste and fill out the questions below.

    1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no
    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other
    3. How many people are in your team?
    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?

    Any other comments are appreciated as well, about the license terms, or required Visual Studio versions.

    Thanks,
    Your Pex team
    1. Just in some proof of conept projects in visual studio.
    2. pro
    3. Just me
    4. A

    While the unit test generation is very impressive, I find Moles at least as interesting to intercept calls to just about anything with no need to clutter the code under test. Ideally all of pex would be available for commercial use in VS 2008 pro, but I'd settle for just the stubs framework.
    Saturday, December 5, 2009 3:53 AM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no

    Have used it with VS2008 Team on a previous consultancy assignment

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other
    Have used it with VS2008 Team on a previous consultancy assignment and now wish to use it on VS2010 Pro (currently at beta 2)

    3. How many people are in your team?
    5 in current team

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?
    Intend to use both with VS2010 Pro and Pex, once the SKU issue is sorted out with VS2010 Pro.
    Monday, December 7, 2009 4:56 PM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no
    A) From Visual Studio
    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other
    B) VS 2010 Pro Beta 2
    3. How many people are in your team?
    3) 3
    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?
    So far B)

    But I cannot do much since I am not running a Team version of Visual Studio.  A version for Pro is most desirable
    Monday, December 7, 2009 6:47 PM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no
    D) No
    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other
    A) VS 2008 Professional
    3. How many people are in your team?
    5
    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?
    A) Parameterized Unit Tests(PUTs)

    I'd really like to see this feature included in the Professional Edition.
    Monday, December 14, 2009 4:14 PM
  • Ketico>>I'd really like to see this feature included in the Professional Edition.

    So would I!
    Tuesday, December 15, 2009 5:53 AM
  • Nice job with Pex...keep up the good work :)

    1. A and B
    2. C - VS2010 Ultimate Beta 2
    3. 3 members
    4. A

    Cheers :)
    Tuesday, December 15, 2009 3:27 PM
  • 1. Only using Pex from Visual Studio right now.
    2. VS Professional
    3. Only 2, at the moment.
    4. I use the wizard as a starting point and then complement its tests with my own. :)
    Tuesday, January 12, 2010 5:42 PM
  • Hello,

    1. (A) From Visual Studio

    2. (A) Professional

    3. 3-4

    4. (B)

    Best Regards,
    Martin
    Friday, January 15, 2010 4:28 PM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no

    A

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other

    B

    3. How many people are in your team?

    Working with Pex, only me ATM... after I have adopted at least one project completely I will start spreading it like a virus to every other developer ;)

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?

    B to start with, A to finetune, remove or group test... mostly to improve coverage.
    Thursday, February 18, 2010 7:38 AM
  • 1. A
    2. B
    3. 5
    4. A & B

    nice day
    Thursday, February 18, 2010 1:40 PM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already? (A)
    A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? (B)
    A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other

    3. How many people are in your team? (10)

    4. Do you write (A)
    A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?
    Thursday, February 18, 2010 2:11 PM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no

       A. From Visual Studio

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other

       A. Professional

    3. How many people are in your team?

       10

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?

       A. Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs)
    Wednesday, March 17, 2010 8:35 PM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no

       E. Not anymore, since it is locked away behind a MSDN Subscription. (And we can't affort a MSDN subscription)
           Too bad, because it was a promising technique.

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other

       A. Team Edition

    3. How many people are in your team?

       70

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?

       B. The wizard
    Thursday, March 18, 2010 8:37 AM

  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no
    A & B

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other
    VS2010pro (other team members vs2008pro)

    3. How many people are in your team?
    4

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?
    A


    Dirty Denver ()=={=,=,=,=,=,===========>
    Tuesday, April 20, 2010 3:14 PM
  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no

    - D


    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other

    - C


    3. How many people are in your team?

    - 100


    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?

    - B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs
    Major barriers to entry for my team..
    We are allowed to use only "released" version of the software , which comes with gaurantee to get support for. Any approx. idea when Pex and Moles are going to make it to release?
    Tuesday, June 15, 2010 12:09 PM
  • > We are allowed to use only "released" version of the software , which comes with gaurantee to get support for. Any approx. idea when Pex and Moles are going to make it to release?

    Unfortunately we cannot give you the answer to this question (we're not the ones who make that decision). We can only tell you that we've been steadily evolving towards this goal, from a academic only tool, to a devlabs prototype and now to a MSDN powertools.


    Jonathan "Peli" de Halleux - Like Pex and Moles on Facebook!
    Wednesday, June 16, 2010 10:02 AM


  • 1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no

    Yes, Only VS 2010, no commandline


    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other

    VS 2010 Ultimate


    3. How many people are in your team?

    On my own.


    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?

    Until now, I dont get the expected "test values" and have some problems to get real good coverage done (made some forums questions).

    I want to use B.

    Monday, July 26, 2010 9:45 AM
  • Hi,

    1. Are you using Pex already? A) From Visual Studio, B) the command-line, C) other, D) no

    From Visual Studio (A); I have tried the command-line, but found it a bit threatening, since it has so many options.

    2. Which version of Visual Studio are you using? A) Professional, B) Team System, C) other

    VS2010 Premium

    3. How many people are in your team?

    Not currently using this in a team;

    4. Do you write A) Parameterized Unit Tests (PUTs), or B) only use the Wizard-generated PUT stubs?

    PUTs (A), but I started out with the wizard-generated PUT stubs, just to get a better feeling with how to use them.

    I'm currently checking out the Code Contracts stuff, good stuff, very good stuff. And in combination with PEX it really rocks. I would not mind seeing the two get even tighter connected.

    Keep up the good work on PEX.
    Meile Zetstra


    http://blogger.xs4all.nl/mzetstra

    Monday, July 26, 2010 11:17 AM