Skip to main content

An alternative approach to structuring your tests in XUnit

I typically write my unit tests using the AAA(Arrange-Act-Assert) pattern. This pattern splits a test in 3 sections:

  • The Arrange section of a unit test method initializes objects and sets the value of the data that is passed to the method under test.
  • The Act section invokes the method under test with the arranged parameters.
  • The Assert section verifies that the action of the method under test behaves as expected.

Here is an example from one of my projects using XUnit:

In the example above you can see that I include the 3 sections of the AAA pattern inside the test method itself.

Recently I was reading a blog post by Jeremy Miller where I noticed he was using a different approach to separate the 3 sections:

In the example above, Jeremy is using the IAsyncLifetime feature of XUnit to split the 3 sections:

This also works when you don't need async logic by using the constructor and the regular IDisposable interface:

What I like about this approach is that you have less repetitive code as the same arrange and act code can be used for multiple asserts. It allows you to easily group your test by test scenario and bring them logically together in one test class.

And as a nice bonus, it also solves the problem of finding good names for your test classes!

Popular posts from this blog

Azure DevOps/ GitHub emoji

I’m really bad at remembering emoji’s. So here is cheat sheet with all emoji’s that can be used in tools that support the github emoji markdown markup: All credits go to rcaviers who created this list.

Podman– Command execution failed with exit code 125

After updating WSL on one of the developer machines, Podman failed to work. When we took a look through Podman Desktop, we noticed that Podman had stopped running and returned the following error message: Error: Command execution failed with exit code 125 Here are the steps we tried to fix the issue: We started by running podman info to get some extra details on what could be wrong: >podman info OS: windows/amd64 provider: wsl version: 5.3.1 Cannot connect to Podman. Please verify your connection to the Linux system using `podman system connection list`, or try `podman machine init` and `podman machine start` to manage a new Linux VM Error: unable to connect to Podman socket: failed to connect: dial tcp 127.0.0.1:2655: connectex: No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it. That makes sense as the podman VM was not running. Let’s check the VM: >podman machine list NAME         ...

Cleaner switch expressions with pattern matching in C#

Ever find yourself mapping multiple string values to the same result? Being a C# developer for a long time, I sometimes forget that the C# has evolved so I still dare to chain case labels or reach for a dictionary. Of course with pattern matching this is no longer necessary. With pattern matching, you can express things inline, declaratively, and with zero repetition. A small example I was working on a small script that should invoke different actions depending on the environment. As our developers were using different variations for the same environment e.g.  "tst" alongside "test" , "prd" alongside "prod" .  We asked to streamline this a long time ago, but as these things happen, we still see variations in the wild. This brought me to the following code that is a perfect example for pattern matching: The or keyword here is a logical pattern combinator , not a boolean operator. It matches if either of the specified pattern...