Skip to content

Doc for adapter defaulttimeout updated#1142

Open
OsirisTerje wants to merge 1 commit intomasterfrom
adapter_defaulttimeout
Open

Doc for adapter defaulttimeout updated#1142
OsirisTerje wants to merge 1 commit intomasterfrom
adapter_defaulttimeout

Conversation

@OsirisTerje
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

| PrivateBinPath | string | directory1;directory2;etc | ? |
| RandomSeed | int | seed integer | random |
| DefaultTimeout | int | timeout in mS, 0 means infinite | 0 |
| DefaultTimeout | int | timeout in mS, 0 means infinite. Not for .net >5.0, error with NUnit 4.5.0 | 0 |
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

❓are we trying to say that both:

  • This is not for .NET 5.0 and greater (e.g. only for .NET core and earlier)
  • ..except for NUnit 4.5.0, when it always throws an error?

I think we need some clarity here and then I can make a suggestion to update the language

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

DefaultTimeout only works for .net framework (and earlier versions of .net core, that is < 5.0, but we don't support that anymore anyway, as we have .net 6 as the lowest currently)

Copy link
Member Author

@OsirisTerje OsirisTerje Feb 28, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@SeanKilleen Do you have a good way to express this in a short sentence. All my attempts ends up in a long explanation 😫
In NUnit pre 4.5.0, it is silently ignored for .net core > 5.0, but works for .net framework and for those version that support earlier version of .net core than version 5.0.
In NUnit 4.5.0 it fails the test for .net core > 5.0, but works for .net framework.

We could add a description section below, like done for the most of the other properties, where it is explained in details, and keep this short and... ahem.. incomprehensible.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@OsirisTerje I tried to turn this over in my head a bunch and I think a description below, with a reference to it here, is the best outcome. You could put a truth table in that description to explain it. Let me know if you want me to take a shot at that.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants