What about sharing a mock that is populated in [Setup] and set to null in [Teardown]? I've done/do this and when a change comes up I deal with it at that time.
Tim On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Patrick Steele <[email protected]>wrote: > Ok, fair enough (although this is usually the time when I say you > should be looking for a new job with a better company that values the > input of its developers...) > > Back to the original question: Don't re-use a mock object across > multiple tests. Your tests should be running totally in isolation and > if a single mock is used across multiple tests, your tests aren't > isolated (side effects of operations in one test could affect the > results of another test). And I can almost guarantee you that at some > point in the future, someone will need something slightly different > with that mock, they'll change it for their test and every other test > in the class will break. > > Just create the new mock using the code you posted at the beginning of > each test. > > --- > Patrick Steele > http://weblogs.asp.net/psteele > > > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 3:36 AM, rssole <[email protected]> wrote: > > Unfortunately, it is not up to me it is (more or less) matter of > > politics and this particular environment, > > where on build server as part of CI where tests are also run, there > > also 3.5 is not available. > > But that is completely another story... > > > > > > On Nov 18, 5:55 pm, Patrick Steele <[email protected]> wrote: > >> You could make things easier by having your unit tests written for > >> .NET 3.5, but your application code can still target 2.0. I did this > >> a lot when the company I was working for was slow to push 3.5 out to > >> the users. Devs had it on their machines (and we're the only ones > >> that ran the unit tests), so we used Rhino.Mocks + .NET 3.5 in the > >> unit tests. > >> > >> --- > >> Patrick Steelehttp://weblogs.asp.net/psteele > >> > >> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 11:46 AM, rssole <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Perhaps someone will wonder why using full static invocation syntax > >> > instead of extensions, delegates instead of lambdas etc. > >> > well I am refactoring and adding unit tests to some old .net 2.0 (c# > >> > 2.0) project where extensions and other c# 3.0 stuff is out of reach > :) > >> > >> > -- > >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Rhino.Mocks" group. > >> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<rhinomocks%[email protected]> > . > >> > For more options, visit this group athttp:// > groups.google.com/group/rhinomocks?hl=en. > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Rhino.Mocks" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<rhinomocks%[email protected]> > . > > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rhinomocks?hl=en. > > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Rhino.Mocks" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<rhinomocks%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rhinomocks?hl=en. > > -- Tim Barcz Microsoft C# MVP Microsoft ASPInsider http://timbarcz.devlicio.us http://www.twitter.com/timbarcz -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Rhino.Mocks" 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/rhinomocks?hl=en.
