Fixes #271: Use parametrize markers params for getting example_kwargs

[sliwinski-milosz]

User can parametrize scenario by using examples specified in feature files. In that case pytest parametrize marker is updated with examples parameters.

We also provide a way to parametrize scenario on the python side by using pytest.mark.parametrize. https://pytest-bdd.readthedocs.io/en/latest/#combine-scenario-outline-and-pytest-parametrization

The problem with gherkin reporting is that when we are getting self.example_kwargs, we are using scenario.get_example_params() method that takes into account only args that are defined inside feature file (examples), and skips pytest.mark.parametrize parameters.

For gherkin reporting we need all parameters: those specified in feature files and those specified by using pytest.mark.parametrize decorator.

This pull requests uses parametrize marker to get all args.

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.3%) to 93.817% when pulling 0646548 on sliwinski-milosz:gherkin_reporter_parametrized_tests_fix into 72a8764 on pytest-dev:master.

[sliwinski-milosz]

Please before merging, let me add similar test as in fix of unicode steps (but to do that easily unicode steps fix needs to be merged)

[sliwinski-milosz]

I added test and I made test function bit more generic.

However I still think that it would be good to firstly merge the fix for CI tests :)

[sliwinski-milosz]

Please note that "work in progress" label can be removed. This pull request is ready for review.

[youtux]

This function was used only once, and it's implementation was tied to the caller. I would say to remove it and let the caller test_scenario_in_expanded_mode test manage the resources (and let the test be in the pytest-bdd style, not a normal test)

[sliwinski-milosz]

I will rewrite it to pytest-bdd style.

I added prepare_feature_and_py_files to be able to reuse feature files that are already in other tests, to test them in expanded mode.

I will remove it, and I'll create separate tests for gherkin reporter. That means that we may have some duplication but it is safer approach.

[sliwinski-milosz]

Tests have been rewritten to pytest-bdd style.

[youtux]

what is this test asserting? There is no "then" step

[sliwinski-milosz]

You already have asked that question :). Shall we add comment somewhere in the code explaining what this test is testing?

#272 (comment)

[youtux]

we are asserting that the test pass, but not the behaviour of the terminal report, which is the whole point of this test.

[sliwinski-milosz]

The problem that this pull request fixes is that expanded gherkin report was crashing while reporting test_parametrized test.
So this assertion just checks if test was able to run or if there was a crash.

[sliwinski-milosz]

I think this PR is also ready for review :)