Behat: Get a list of scenarios

[patxi1980]

I will find very usefull to have an option for formatting behat output only to list the scenarios that i have in the application.

The progress option is fine, but if i want only the list of scenarios i have it is useless.

The pretty option has the scenarios, but also have the steps, so it have too much information.

I understand that i have to have control of which scenarios i have and which not, but nowadays i have more than 200 scenarios (and growing), and sometimes it is difficult to know which ones are missing, and which ones are obsolete.

[stof]

I think this is a formatter which could be added in the core. What do you think @everzet ?

In the meantime, extensions are able to register formatters in 3.0

[everzet]

I think this feature will be awesome for core. And fairly easy to implement

[dave1010]

In addition to formatting executed test output (--format), it would be useful to be able to list the scenarios without executing them (like how --definitions works). I do this crudely at the moment with bash: for i in features/*.feature; do head -n 4 $i; grep ' Scenario' $i; echo; done

Another useful thing (both as a format output for executing and listing without executing) would be just listing features, with no scenarios or steps.

[stof]

@dave1010 there is --dry-run to skip the execution

[dave1010]

@stof --dry-run still lists all the steps. I guess I'm thinking something along the lines of:

• --format terse executes but doesn't show steps, just scenarios and features (as proposed by @patxi1980 originally)
• --format very-terse executes but doesn't show steps or scenarios, just features
• --dry-run --terse same as --dry-run but doesn't show steps, just scenarios and features
• --dry-run --very-terse same as --dry-run but but doesn't show steps or scenarios, just features

I guess an extension could provide the different formatters for execution. I'm not sure about dry-run formatting.

[stof]

@dave1010 using --dry-run has no impact on the format of the output. they are unrelated settings. So it would be --dry-run --format terse doing it

[dave1010]

@stof ah, I think that makes sense. So if --format terse was implemented then it would automatically have the same output for --dry-run.

[stof]

yes exactly.

[netraagal]

Hi,
Is this solution developped on the actual version ?