Hi, The problem I have with this approach is that if you don't want a public interface (or want a very limited public interface) its difficult when doing TDD as it means your tests have to do a lot to get around the limited public interface.
However, I have found using internals and InternalsVisibleTo solves this problem for me. Ben http://Blog.BenHall.me.uk On 29/10/2007, Claudio Maccari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > IMHO if you really code using TestDrivenDevelopment you write code just to > get your test "green". > In this case you don't have a line a code without test. > If run code coverage you can check this. > > I also believe that this is not so easy to do. > Cheers, > makka > > > Maccari Claudio > http://blogs.ugidotnet.org/makka > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Steve Dunn > Sent: lunedì 29 ottobre 2007 17.21 > To: MbUnit.User > Subject: MbUnit Re: How to test non public metods > > > Hi there, > Generally, a Unit Test is testing 'behavior' rather than > implementation. You are testing that Behavior X, given valid or > invalid data, returns a certain value, and optionally, via Mocking, > calls certain method a certain number of times. > > Up until recently, I tried to test every single bit of implementation > and ended up with some tests in the same assembly and some tests > externally (http://stevedunns.blogspot.com/2007/07/challenging- > conventions-with-test-first.html). Dave Astels responded that > behavior is what is seen from the outside. > > I've found since changing my approach, that any code not being covered > by tests is not really being used by the exposed behavior and hence > doesn't need to be there. > > Cheers, > > Steve > http://dunnhq.com > > > On Oct 25, 3:42 pm, ales_75 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm new in TDD and Unit testing, I have a simple question. > > We are developing huge application and now we are thinking about > > automatic test of our code. > > If we are start "Test first" development, how can I test all my code > > if there are non public members of classes? > > We do not want to release our application with test inside our > > assemblies, so I think that we must have Test assemblies in which we > > will have Test. > > In release build of our application we do not ship Test assemblies. > > But I cannot imagine how we can write our code with "Test First" > > development, because all members of our classes are not public, so I > > cannot test them all. > > Can you point me to some materials where is how-to do that? > > Or "Test First" development is only for public members of classes? > > If I have to test only public classes, then most of tests will be > > complicated and will not describe our code well. > > > > May be that this question is stupid, but if someone can help me with > > it, It will be geat. > > > > Sorry for my poor english. > > > > Ales > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MbUnit.User" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/MbUnitUser?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
