I do not understand.
Why in NUnit and in new Junt instead of simplest agreements of tests naming attributes and annotations are used. All the same, it's very difficult to give more suitable names to SetUp, TearDown and TestSomething methods.
It's hard to agree with an opinion that it's more clear in such a way
[SetUp]
public void SetUp() {}
Class attribute instead of the inheritance from TestCase is great. Now the free place of ancestor a class being tested can get. This is for a case of protected stuff is desired to be tested.
Yes, if in a base class suddenly there are methods which names start with Test and which are not tests themselves then indeed needed things can be selected only with explicit attributes. But this is such a rare case...
P.S. Many other things related to testing I consider are better to implement with attributed.
No comments:
Post a Comment