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 });

CC -Dprivate=public

“CC”是我使用的系统上的命令行编译器。-Dfoo=bar相当于#define foo bar。因此，这个编译选项有效地将所有私有内容更改为公共。

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.

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.

我倾向于不使用编译器指令，因为它们很快就会把事情弄得乱七八糟。如果你真的需要它们，一种缓解它的方法是把它们放在一个partial类中，并让你的构建在制作产品版本时忽略那个.cs文件。

在CodeProject上，有一篇文章简要讨论了测试私有方法的优缺点。然后它提供一些反射代码来访问私有方法(类似于Marcus上面提供的代码)。我在这个示例中发现的唯一问题是代码没有考虑重载方法。

你可以在这里找到文章:

http://www.codeproject.com/KB/cs/testnonpublicmembers.aspx