Article: > "Originally the unit in “unit test” did not refer to the system under test but the test itself. Meaning the test can be executed as one unit and doe

Article: > "Originally the unit in “unit test” did not refer to the system under test but the test itself. Meaning the test can be executed as one unit and does not depend on other tests to run upfront (see here and here)." I find the links provided to support for this proposition underwhelming. In any case it matters zero. No-one interprets unit test that way any more. Everyone interprets it the other way round, like defined on Wikipedia: > "In computer programming, unit testing is a software testing method by which individual units of source code—sets of one or more computer program modules together with associated control data, usage procedures, and operating procedures—are tested to determine whether they are fit for use. Unit tests are typically automated tests written and run by software developers to ensure that a section of an application (known as the "unit") meets its design and behaves as intended. In procedural programming, a unit could be an entire module, but it is more commonly an individual function or procedure. In object-oriented programming, a unit is often an entire interface, such as a class, or an individual method." -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_testing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_testing It's generally accepted good practice to not have dependencies between unit tests. Dependencies between unit tests are generally accepted as bad practice.