> The brittlest tests I've ever seen have been mock-heavy unit tests Not to knock mocking in general, but the need to replace multiple things at once to test o

> The brittlest tests I've ever seen have been mock-heavy unit tests Not to knock mocking in general, but the need to replace multiple things at once to test one thing is just a big design smell, and I agree: their usefulness tends to be very limited in terms of logic exercised. Call me a fuddy-dud, but I'm generally working with dependancy injection when doing OOP so stubbing out app layers for test contexts feels kinda natural, and I prefer to make my test mocks the old fashioned way: manually using inheritance. It keeps the pain high if I'm doing something wrong, keeps the tests focused, and means I'm hammering the objects design from the POV of an inheritor/reuser from the get-go. I've noticed that the additions necessary to make a manual mock tend to be a good predictor of future changes required in the code-base, while framework based mocks tend to spend a lot of time re-declaring things we already know.