我正在构建一个类库,它将有一些公共和私有方法。我希望能够对私有方法进行单元测试(主要是在开发过程中,但也可以用于将来的重构)。

正确的做法是什么?


当前回答

这里有一篇关于私有方法单元测试的好文章。但是我不知道哪个更好,是让你的应用程序专门为测试而设计(就像只为测试而创建测试)还是使用反射来测试。 我敢肯定大多数人都会选择第二种方式。

其他回答

I don't agree with the "you should only be interested in testing the external interface" philosophy. It's a bit like saying that a car repair shop should only have tests to see if the wheels turn. Yes, ultimately I'm interested in the external behavior but I like my own, private, internal tests to be a bit more specific and to the point. Yes, if I refactor, I may have to change some of the tests, but unless it's a massive refactor, I'll only have to change a few and the fact that the other (unchanged) internal tests still work is a great indicator that the refactoring has been successful.

You can try to cover all internal cases using only the public interface and theoretically it's possible to test every internal method (or at least every one that matters) entirely by using the public interface but you may have to end up standing on your head to achieve this and the connection between the test cases being run through the public interface and the internal portion of the solution they're designed to test may be difficult or impossible to discern. Having pointed, individual tests that guarantee that the internal machinery is working properly is well worth the minor test changes that come about with refactoring - at least that's been my experience. If you have to make huge changes to your tests for every refactoring, then maybe this doesn't make sense, but in that case, maybe you ought to rethink your design entirely. A good design should be flexible enough to allow for most changes without massive redesigns.

在极少数情况下,我想要测试私有函数,我通常会将它们修改为受保护的,并且我已经编写了一个带有公共包装器函数的子类。

类:

...

protected void APrivateFunction()
{
    ...
}

...

测试子类:

...

[Test]
public void TestAPrivateFunction()
{
    APrivateFunction();
    //or whatever testing code you want here
}

...

你可以用两种方法对私有方法进行单元测试

you can create instance of PrivateObject class the syntax is as follows PrivateObject obj= new PrivateObject(PrivateClass); //now with this obj you can call the private method of PrivateCalss. obj.PrivateMethod("Parameters"); You can use reflection. PrivateClass obj = new PrivateClass(); // Class containing private obj Type t = typeof(PrivateClass); var x = t.InvokeMember("PrivateFunc", BindingFlags.InvokeMethod | BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance, null, obj, new object[] { 5 });

这里有一篇关于私有方法单元测试的好文章。但是我不知道哪个更好,是让你的应用程序专门为测试而设计(就像只为测试而创建测试)还是使用反射来测试。 我敢肯定大多数人都会选择第二种方式。

1)如果你有一个遗留代码,那么测试私有方法的唯一方法就是反射。

2)如果它是新代码,那么你有以下选项:

使用反射(使之复杂) 在同一个类中编写单元测试(使生产代码变得丑陋 其中还包含测试代码) 在某种util类中重构并使方法为公共 使用@VisibleForTesting注释并删除private

I prefer the annotation method, simplest and least complicated. The only issue is that we have increased the visibility which I think is not a big concern. We should always be coding to interface, so if we have an interface MyService and an implementation MyServiceImpl then we can have the corresponding test classes that is MyServiceTest (test interface methods) and MyServiceImplTest (test private methods). All clients should anyway be using the interface so in a way even though the visibility of the private method has been increased it should not really matter.