How to use AutoFac with SpecFlow.SharedSteps?

[aoletubo]

Hi all,

I'm trying to use AutoFac instead of DependancyInjection on our solution as it the only one that allow the definition of object instance at Global Level, Feature level and Scenario Level - DependancyInjection do not allow the Global level.
But we are using the nugget SpecFlow.SharedSteps to share common step to several scenario.

My problem is that when SpecFlow.SharedSteps invoke the other scenario, the container is not pass to it and so all the classes that has been instantiated from the "caller" scenario are "reseted" on the child scenario.

How can we pass the current IObjectContainer to the called scenario to not loose the current context?

thanks a lot

[gasparnagy]

SpecFlow.SharedSteps (I have never heard about this before) is a plugin for SpecFlow. It will definitely not work with Reqnroll as it is. You need to adapt the code to Reqnroll or ask the maintainer to do so.

[aoletubo]

the probleme in that the method representing the scenario is generated by ReqNRoll as it is scenario from features..
how could I had the container to it by default? :\

[gasparnagy]

Sorry @aoletubo... I don't understand the question. Why do you want to pass the container to the generated scenario method? Please try to share the relevant code here, maybe we see it better from that.

[aoletubo]

In our campaigns, we often have a lot on scenario that start with creating an object then we do different action/validation on it regarding the case.

on the scenario dependancy, I put the webDriver class.
In the following scenario example, the webDrivr is created when calling the "sub-scenario" S_Create_Account_PopUp_Summary_Page_User_Info , but we tryed to stop it on the main scenario by the step "I stop the webdriver".

My problem is: as the SharedSteps code use the invoke method on the method generated by ReqNRoll on the scenario "S_Create_Account_PopUp_Summary_Page_User_Info ", the webDriver instantiation is known only on the "S_Create_Account_PopUp_Summary_Page_User_Info " scenario execution as it is considers as a single scenario,
but when coming back to the main scenario to execute the I stop the webdriver, the webdriver object is null on the container of current scenario

Example of one scenario.
Given I execute the steps of: | feature | scenario | | UserAccount | S_Create_Account_PopUp_Summary_Page_User_Info | And I stop the webdriver Given I execute the steps of: | feature | scenario | | UserAccount_Common | S_User_Account_Go_To_Customer_Information_Page | And BOOKINGENGINE I "log" a "UserInformationAccount" user and I expect the error "" | Login | Password | | [TestUserEmail] | MyTestPassword |

That's why I need to pass the current container to the "sub-scenario" to have a continuity on the object availability and status

[gasparnagy]

I don't think this is easily possible.
I suggest you look at the generated code-behind class of a sample scenario, maybe that helps you to find a way.

During normal execution, the scenario methods receive the container in the following way:

1. The generated TestInitializeAsync() method is called by the test framework. This calls TestRunnerManager.GetTestRunnerForAssembly to get a test runner.
2. Then the scenario method is called by the test framework (this is what you call directly)...
3. The method calls the generated ScenarioInitialize method, that invokes testRunner.OnScenarioInitialize(scenarioInfo). This call instructs Reqnroll to create and setup a brand new scenario container.
4. Then the generated ScenarioStartAsync() that essentially invoke the [BeforeScenario] hooks.
5. Then the rest of the scenario method is called that run the individual steps

As you can see from above, if you call the scenario method via reflection, it will create a new container via the ScenarioInitialize method. The ScenarioInitialize method is not virtual, so you cannot easily override, but maybe you can with the proxy magic.

You can also consider to make an ITestRunner wrapper that filters the calls based on your needs and set the testRunner field to this wrapper in the feature proxy class instead of the real test runner.

[aoletubo]

Thanks for this details.
I will look at how I can handle it.

Thanks a lot for your help. will come back to you to let you know if I found a new solution :)