Implemented IJSInProcessRuntime and IJSUnmarshalledRuntime interf…

[KristofferStrube]

Pull request description

Pull request for issue #222
I use #IF NET5_0 in the middle of namespaces/classes to differentiate what can be implemented in the different versions. This might not follow the AspNetCore coding guidelines.

PR meta checklist

• Pull request is targeting at DEV branch.
• I have read the CONTRIBUTING.md document.
• Pull request is linked to all related issues, if any.

Content checklist

• My code follows the code style of this project and AspNetCore coding guidelines.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I have updated the appropriate sub section in the CHANGELOG.md.
• I have added, updated or removed tests to according to my changes.
  • All tests passed.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #279 (1e6915a) into dev (8235d93) will increase coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##              dev     #279      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   82.61%   82.64%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         118      118              
  Lines        3607     3612       +5     
  Branches      468      468              
==========================================
+ Hits         2980     2985       +5     
  Misses        480      480              
  Partials      147      147              

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/bunit.web/JSInterop/BunitJSInterop.cs	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update b83bd3f...1e6915a. Read the comment docs.

[egil]

Looks pretty good I think. Besides a few missing "happy path tests" in strict mode, I think you are almost there.

[egil]

Latest changes looks good to me.

[KristofferStrube]

I will just add some more tests for the "happy path tests" later today. Do you think it's ready for non-draft Pull-Request after that?

[egil]

Looks good. Only seem to be missing some happy path IJSUnmarshalledRuntime tests.

[egil]

I unchecked the My change requires a change to the documentation. since I do not think this is necessary. The way we have set this up should result in a "it just works" experience for users. The task #261 should cover a general description of this feature.

[egil]

Looks good to me.

[egil]

I will just add some more tests for the "happy path tests" later today. Do you think it's ready for non-draft Pull-Request after that?

It was ready to begin with 🙂

Just missing the happy path tests, then we can close this.

[egil]

There are a few code style/code cleanup tidbits here, but otherwise I think we are done.

[egil]

This looks good. Thanks.