3 ms·
You’ve never ever had to be mindful about isolation of tests? Also, Unit tests aren’t the only tests that exist. You say assured? You think it’s impossible to
by aleksiy123 2mo ago
You’ve never ever had to be mindful about isolation of tests? Also, Unit tests aren’t the only tests that exist.
You say assured? You think it’s impossible to write 2 tests that interact each other?
All you gotta do is google “test isolation”. But if you want to pretend it’s not a thing the I have no idea what to tell you?
Here’s one example since junit came up
https://martinfowler.com/bliki/JunitNewInstance.html https://martinfowler.com/bliki/JunitNewInstance.html
- locknitpicker 2mo ago> You’ve never ever had to be mindful about isolation of tests? Also, Unit tests aren’t the only tests that exist. No. Frameworks take care of it out of the box, and you need to go way out of your way to mess that up. > Also, Unit tests aren’t the only tests that exist. True, but that's immaterial to the discussion. > All you gotta do is google “test isolation”. Yes,and if you follow your own recommendations you will eventually discover that virtually all testing frameworks are explicitly designed with test isolation in mind, to the point that you need to go way out of your way to design custom test fixtures to share context across test runs. > Here’s one example since junit came up I seriously do not think you even read the article you are citing. Did you even bothered to open the link?
- aleksiy123 2mo ago¯\_(ツ)_/¯ You can believe whatever you want to believe. Or maybe you live in a magical world where all your tests are pure and side effects nor IO exist. In the other thread you think running tests in parallel doesn't count because it has documented gotchas...