MbUnit is extendible by design. If a feature is missing, you can add it without recompiling MbUnit (and without asking for permission).
On 4/18/07, Andrew Stopford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > MSTest, NUnit, ZaneBug and MbUnit all work with TestDriven.net which is > the very best way of running unit tests in VS. csUnit and MSTest have there > own test runners for VS, MSTest does have support for its own runner and the > td.net runner. > > Andy > > > On 4/18/07, Andrew Stopford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > btw If anyone has any corrections or additions then please do email them > > on. > > > > Andy > > > > On 4/18/07, Andrew Stopford <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'll try and present an honest and level arguement for you. Choosing a > > > framework really depends on your what your testing requirements are for > > > now > > > and the future. Some of the features I wil mention below will need you to > > > research further but hopefully you can match your requirements against the > > > features. > > > > > > All 3 frameworks (as well csUnit and ZaneBug) have the same set of > > > basic asserts and fixtures. > > > All 3 frameworks work with TestDriven.net which is the very best way > > > of running unit tests in VS. > > > MSTest is bound until VS Orcas to the VSTS additions of VS, when Orcas > > > ships it will be available in the pro sku additions of VS. csUnit, > > > ZaneBug, MbUnit and NUnit all work on all sku additions of VS2003 and > > > VS2005. > > > MbUnit and NUnit both have collection and array asserts (ZaneBug and > > > MSTest may have collection asserts, can someone confirm that?). > > > MbUnit and NUnit have fixtures for setting the running order, excludes > > > and includes (I think ZaneBug has something like this too, Sean ?? :)) > > > MbUnit has a greatest degree of asserts of all frameworks including > > > asserrts for perf, reflection, compiler and others. > > > MbUnit and MSTest have the ability to test private methods, MbUnit has > > > a richer support for this. > > > MbUnit and MSTest have the ability data drive unit tests, MSTest can > > > do this from a database or XML file, MbUnit is currantly XML file only. > > > MbUnit is the only framework to support row testing and pair wise > > > testing (row testing is on the ZaneBug road map). > > > ZaneBug has the richest support of all frameworks for performance > > > indicators and testing. > > > NUnit is the only framework to support constraints. > > > NUnit is the only framework to run on Mono (on the MbUnit and ZaneBug > > > roadmaps). > > > NUnit as the oldest framework has the greatest degree of articles > > > (MbUnit as a much younger project is building this up with every passing > > > month), books and the biggest adoption within test and CI tools (however > > > NUnit and MbUnit are supported natively with the mostly widely used CI > > > server, CCNet). > > > > > > I hope that helps. > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > On 4/18/07, Mahes <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm rather new to unit testing. > > > > > > > > And I have to choose a testing platform now. > > > > > > > > Anybody who can tell me what MBUnit can do that NUnit or > > > > mstest(Visual > > > > Studio for Software testers) can't do? > > > > I don't want answers like: It's great, It's the best.. but I'm > > > > looking for the differences on wich I can base my choice. > > > > > > > > TIA > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
