Add comments to binding gen tests for invocations on new lines

[layomia]

Addresses #91218 (comment).

[ghost]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-extensions-configuration
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Issue Details

---

Addresses #91218 (comment).

Author:	layomia
Assignees:	layomia
Labels:	area-Extensions-Configuration
Milestone:	8.0.0

[tarekgh]

I added an extra suggestion, LGTM otherwise. Thanks!

[jeffhandley]

Each statement through here should get the same treatment of a comment for each different variation of syntax. @tarekgh -- Or should we make each scenario its own [Fact] to make it even more clear?

[tarekgh]

I think having separate Fact method for each case will be too much especially if we'll need to add more in the future. The most important thing for me is to ensure that anyone touching this code will get a chance to see the attached comment to that line of code and understand why we wrote it this way.

[jeffhandley]

@layomia / @tarekgh -- I pushed a couple commits that expand on the comments and reorganize the tests a bit. If this looks good to you, I'll also approve and we can merge.

The spirit of what I changed:

1. Separate out the API scenarios into their own tests
2. Within each test, organize and comment on the newline scenarios covered
3. Add newline scenarios for "Newlines in every possible place"
4. In the tests with multiple asserts, do not reuse record instances across the asserts (to guard against a hidden failure).
5. Refactor the Assert method out and have it perform a single Assert on a Tuple so that both values are shown together (so that if the assert fails, the message will be clearer)

@layomia In the ConfigurationExtensions tests, there were no Asserts in the test. Are asserts needed, or does a non-throwing execution indicate success?

[tarekgh]

@jeffhandley changes LGTM. Thanks!

Jeff already submitted the commits that address his comments.

[layomia]

@layomia In the ConfigurationExtensions tests, there were no Asserts in the test. Are asserts needed, or does a non-throwing execution indicate success?

Indeed non-throwing execution indicates success. The tests are really testing successful compilation. Input syntax doesn't affect the emitted binding logic, which is being tested by the other functional tests.

[layomia]

Thanks Jeff & Tarek for the detailed review; and Jeff thanks for helping to improve the comments.