Comments on: Practical .NET Unit Testing – Free paper released

By: free Typo3 Templates

free Typo3 Templates — Tue, 23 Aug 2011 08:12:33 +0000

Schöner und motivierender Beitrag. Danke

By: Typo3 Templates

Typo3 Templates — Tue, 23 Aug 2011 07:32:40 +0000

Schöner und motivierender Beitrag. Danke

By: Punit

Punit — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 21:15:16 +0000

Appreciate your time and effort. thank you!

By: B A L U

B A L U — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 09:24:42 +0000

Good Stuff.

Thank.

By: links for 2009-08-11 | The Gryphin Experience

links for 2009-08-11 | The Gryphin Experience — Tue, 11 Aug 2009 20:03:09 +0000

[...] Practical .NET Unit Testing – Free paper released This paper currently consists of 5 main sections: * Why Write Unit Tests? * Unit Test Mechanics * Common Unit Testing Strategies * Designing for Testability * Advanced Techniques (tags: development .net unittesting) [...]

By: slamidtfyn

slamidtfyn — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 07:36:37 +0000

Very good paper. Looking forward to read the yet not finished sections.

By: PB

PB — Thu, 28 May 2009 16:12:43 +0000

[...] – Practical .NET Unit Testing [...]

By: Mahmoud Alam

Mahmoud Alam — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:10:02 +0000

Thank you …

By: Mahmoud Alam

Mahmoud Alam — Fri, 15 May 2009 16:07:32 +0000

Thank you …

By: Samuel Carrijo

Samuel Carrijo — Mon, 04 May 2009 19:17:19 +0000

Another point in slide 19:

“Programming the class against the interfaces is elegant for number of reasons. First, as I mentioned, we’re defining the “how” for retrieving the email addresses. (…)”.

IMHO, interfaces define the “what” who implements the interface does, no matter how. The interface implementation defines “how” to do the “what”.

Also, do any of you guys know any mock framework that lets me create partial mock without the need to create interfaces for everything or declaring a method as virtual? It doesn’t seem right to me modifying good code (e.g. creating an unnecessary interface) just to make testing easier.

Thanks in advance