NUnit：如何在 C# 中使用“ref”参数测试私有方法

发布于 2024-09-10 10:22:29 字数 140 浏览 5 评论 0原文

我有一个如下所示的私有方法：

int void SomeMethod(ref string theStr)
{
   // Some Implementation
}

如何为此方法编写单元测试用例。

原文

I have a private method like below:

int void SomeMethod(ref string theStr)
{
   // Some Implementation
}

how to write the unit test case for this method.

分享到QQ

分享到微博

如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。

发布评论

需要登录才能够评论，你可以免费注册一个本站的账号。

攀登最高峰 2024-09-17 10:22:29

一个方法是 void 但带有一个 ref 参数似乎有点毫无意义。让它返回一个字符串可能是有意义的：

public class FooBar {
 internal string SomeMethod(ref string theStr) { 
    // Some Implementation 
    return theStr;
 }
}

我们还将其设置为 internal 并在 AssemblyInfo.cs 文件中指定 InternalVisibleTo 属性：

 [assembly: InternalsVisibleTo("Test.Assembly")]

这样 SomeMethod > 的行为就像它是内部的（即在其程序集外部不可见），但 Test.Assembly 除外，它将把它视为 public。

单元测试非常简单（无论它是否采用 ref 参数）。

[Test]
public void SomeMethodShouldReturnSomething() { 
   Foobar foobar = new Foobar();
   string actual;
   foobar.SomeMethod(ref actual);
   Assert.AreEqual("I'm the test your tests could smell like", actual);
}

Seems a bit pointless that a method is void but takes a ref parameter. It would probably make sense to make it return a string:

public class FooBar {
 internal string SomeMethod(ref string theStr) { 
    // Some Implementation 
    return theStr;
 }
}

We also make it internal and specify InternalVisibleTo attribute in AssemblyInfo.cs file:

 [assembly: InternalsVisibleTo("Test.Assembly")]

This way SomeMethod will behave as though it's internal (i.e. not visible outside its assembly) except for Test.Assembly, which will see it as public.

The unit test is pretty trivial (regardless of whether or not it takes a ref parameter).

[Test]
public void SomeMethodShouldReturnSomething() { 
   Foobar foobar = new Foobar();
   string actual;
   foobar.SomeMethod(ref actual);
   Assert.AreEqual("I'm the test your tests could smell like", actual);
}

回复收藏 0 原文

我乃一代侩神 2024-09-17 10:22:29

我通常将方法保护起来并提供一个可测试的继承类。例如：

class Foo
{
  protected void SomeMethod(ref string theStr) { ... }
  ...
}

class TestableFoo
{
  public void TestableSomeMethod(ref string theStr)
  {
    base.SomeMethod(...);
  }
  ...

我认为您会找到“您不应该测试私有方法”的答案，但在某些情况下，我发现它对于获取一些棘手的功能很有用。但是，我还发现，在这些情况下，最好将函数提取到它自己的单独的可测试类中。 ymmv。

I usually make the method protected and provide a testable class that inherits. For example:

class Foo
{
  protected void SomeMethod(ref string theStr) { ... }
  ...
}

class TestableFoo
{
  public void TestableSomeMethod(ref string theStr)
  {
    base.SomeMethod(...);
  }
  ...

I think you'll find answers that say "you shouldn't test private methods", but there are cases where I've found it to be useful to get at some tricky functionality. But then, I've also found that in these situations it's better to extract the function into it's own separate testable class. ymmv.

回复收藏 0 原文