Click here to Skip to main content
12,894,249 members (62,570 online)
Click here to Skip to main content
Add your own
alternative version


43 bookmarked
Posted 18 Dec 2006

Unit Testing with TestDriven.NET

, 5 Jan 2007 CPOL
Rate this:
Please Sign up or sign in to vote.
Learn about unit testing from an expert.


Unit testing is the automated testing of software components. The technique is used to build high-quality, reliable software by writing a suite of accompanying automated tests that validate assumptions and business requirements implemented by your software.

Learning to write good unit tests takes time, and it helps to have an experienced software developer guiding you. This article serves as an introduction to both the tools and techniques used in unit testing.


Test Fixtures

Create a new project and copy the code below into a new class file.

Study the following code for a moment. The code implements a Test Fixture, which is a normal class decorated with the special attribute [TestFixture]. Test Fixtures contain Test Methods. Test Methods are decorated with the [Test] attribute. Other decorations, such as [TestFixtureSetup] and [TearDown], are used to decorate methods that have special meanings that will be explained later.

using System;
using NUnit.Framework;

namespace UnitTest
    public class SampleFixture
        // Run once before any methods
        public void InitFixture()

        // Run once after all test methods
        public void TearDownFixture()

        // Run before each test method
        public void Init()

        // Run after each test method
        public void Teardown()

        // Example test method
        public void Add()
            Assert.AreEqual(6, 5, "Expected Failure.");


Running a Test Fixture

You can right-click on any test fixture file and run it directly from Visual Studio .NET. This is the beauty of TestDriven.NET.

Notice in your Error or Output tabs that a failure message appears.

Double-clicking on the failure will take you to the precise line that failed. Correct this line so it will pass, then re-test the Fixture.

Running a Test Method

You may also right-click anywhere inside a method and run just that one method.

Setup/Teardown Methods

If you have setup code that should be run once before any method or once after all methods, use the following attributed methods:

If you have setup code that should run once before each method or once after each method in your fixture, use the following attributed methods:

Tips on Writing Good Unit Tests

A proper unit test has these features:

  • Automated
  • No human input should be required for the test to run and pass. Often this means making use of configuration files that loop through various sets of input values to test everything that you would normally test by running your program over and over.

  • Unordered
  • Unit tests may be run in any order and often are. TestDriven.NET does not guarantee the order in which your fixtures or methods will execute, nor can you be sure that other programmers will know to run your tests in a certain order. If you have many methods sharing common setup or teardown code, use the setup/teardown methods shown above. Otherwise, everything should be contained in the method itself.

  • Self-sufficient
  • Unit tests should perform their own setup/teardown, and optionally may rely upon the setup/teardown methods described above. In no circumstances should a unit test require external setup, such as priming a database with specific values. If setup like that is required, the test method or fixture should do it.

  • Implementation-agnostic
  • Unit tests should validate and enforce business rules, not specific implementations. There is a fine line between the end of a requirement and the beginning of an implementation, yet it is obvious when you are squarely in one territory or the other. Business requirements have a unique smell: there is talk of customers, orders, and workflows. Implementation, on the other hand, smells very different: DataTables, Factories, and foreach() loops. If you find yourself writing unit tests that validate the structure of a Dictionary or a List object, there is a good chance you are testing implementation.

    Unit tests are designed to enforce requirements. Therefore, implementation tests enforce implementation requirements, which is generally a Bad Idea. Implementation is the part you don't care to keep forever. Depending on your skill level, implementations may change and evolve over time to become more efficient, more stable, more secure, etc. The last thing you need are unit tests yelling at you because you found a better way to implement a business solution.

    This advice runs counter to what you may read in other unit testing literature; most authors recommend testing all public methods of all classes. I find that while this is consistent with the goals of testing all code, it often forces tests that do more to enforce implementation than business requirements.

    Business requirements often follow a sequence or pattern, and my view is that the pattern is the real thing to be tested. Writing unit tests for every CustomerHelper class and OrderEntryReferralFactory class often indicates that classes and methods could be organized to better follow the business requirements, or at least wrapped in classes that reflect the requirements.


This article, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)


About the Author

Ben Allfree
United States United States
No Biography provided

You may also be interested in...


Comments and Discussions

GeneralA good start.... Pin
sgclark8-Jan-07 6:12
membersgclark8-Jan-07 6:12 
GeneralRe: A good start.... Pin
Ben Allfree8-Jan-07 6:26
memberBen Allfree8-Jan-07 6:26 
GeneralRe: A good start.... Pin
sgclark8-Jan-07 6:55
membersgclark8-Jan-07 6:55 
GeneralRe: A good start.... Pin
Colin Angus Mackay8-Jan-07 6:45
mvpColin Angus Mackay8-Jan-07 6:45 
GeneralRe: A good start.... Pin
sgclark9-Jan-07 2:49
membersgclark9-Jan-07 2:49 
GeneralHuh. Pin
roberthking8-Jan-07 4:21
memberroberthking8-Jan-07 4:21 
GeneralRe: Huh. Pin
Ben Allfree8-Jan-07 4:45
memberBen Allfree8-Jan-07 4:45 
Hi Robert,

Thanks for the comments. I can tell you're eager to learn about unit testing and that's great, but you can also be more tactful. It takes time to write (and read) articles, so we have to be careful to give each other the benefit of the doubt.

1. This article is one in a series and you are probably looking for the next article. As I said to the other user who made a similar comment, it's very difficult to talk about unit testing without diving into a specific programming methodology, which I intentionally avoided in this short article. Some programmers want to know just how to use the unit test runner and do not wish to hear about any philosophies related to unit testing. At my company, there is a major difference between knowing how to use a tool (this article) and knowing when to use a tool (the article you want).

2. Did you need examples of setup/teardown beyond the description? You are the first programmer I have encountered who has asked for more than the description I provided in this article. I'm happy to add examples, just let me know what is confusing. Articles should not be longer than they need to be and there is just not that much to say about setting up a unit testing framework in VS2005.

3. I would like to hear more from you on "an assertion that unit testing implementation is somehow bad" because I am not sure what you mean. If this dives into a methodology or philosophy discussion, I will save it for the next article Smile | :)

4. You may have missed the last part of this article where I listed several tips on what makes a good unit test, independent of any methodology. If these are available on Testdriven.Net or nUnit sites, please send links because I think they are not.

Let me know if you have any questions.

GeneralRe: Huh. Pin
Colin Angus Mackay8-Jan-07 6:41
mvpColin Angus Mackay8-Jan-07 6:41 
GeneralRe: Huh. Pin
roberthking8-Jan-07 6:41
memberroberthking8-Jan-07 6:41 
GeneralRe: Huh. Pin
Ben Allfree8-Jan-07 7:42
memberBen Allfree8-Jan-07 7:42 
GeneralRe: Huh. Pin
roberthking8-Jan-07 9:55
memberroberthking8-Jan-07 9:55 
GeneralRe: Huh. Pin
Ben Allfree8-Jan-07 13:19
memberBen Allfree8-Jan-07 13:19 
GeneralArticle Pin
Stanislav Panasik18-Dec-06 21:02
memberStanislav Panasik18-Dec-06 21:02 
GeneralRe: Article Pin
Ben Allfree18-Dec-06 21:08
memberBen Allfree18-Dec-06 21:08 
GeneralRe: Article Pin
Stanislav Panasik19-Dec-06 1:45
memberStanislav Panasik19-Dec-06 1:45 

General General    News News    Suggestion Suggestion    Question Question    Bug Bug    Answer Answer    Joke Joke    Praise Praise    Rant Rant    Admin Admin   

Use Ctrl+Left/Right to switch messages, Ctrl+Up/Down to switch threads, Ctrl+Shift+Left/Right to switch pages.

Permalink | Advertise | Privacy | Terms of Use | Mobile
Web02 | 2.8.170424.1 | Last Updated 6 Jan 2007
Article Copyright 2006 by Ben Allfree
Everything else Copyright © CodeProject, 1999-2017
Layout: fixed | fluid