51Testing软件测试论坛

 找回密码
 (注-册)加入51Testing

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

微信登录,快人一步

手机号码,快捷登录

查看: 1875|回复: 0
打印 上一主题 下一主题

When should you remove or change a unit test?

[复制链接]

该用户从未签到

跳转到指定楼层
1#
发表于 2005-12-31 17:14:43 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
As a rule, a passing test should never be removed. That's because passing tests serve as the regression tests for our maintenance work.
They are there to make sure that when we change code we don t break anything else that s already working. Anywhere. That's also why you don't want to change a passing test unless the change is just to make it more readable.

But sometimes we might get some failing tests even though the change was absolutely reasonable. That usually means we ve encountered conflicting requirements. How does that happen? Here s how it might sound:

A year ago company X needed a feature of their calculator to be able to parse any amount of numbers, as long as they are positive. A number of tests were written to satisfy this requirement. Here s one:

[ExpectedException(typeof(Exception), Negatives not allowed )]

Void Sum_Negative1stNumberThrowsExcpeiton()

{

     Sum( -1,1,2 );

}

Today, the VP decided that a new feature is required to have negative numbers allowed in the calculator. A developer not knowing about the previous requirement builds a test case such as this and makes it pass:

Void Sum_Negative1stNumberCalculatesCorrectly()

{

     Int sumResult = Sum( -1,1,2 );

     Assert.AreEqual(2,sumResult);

}

Alas, the earlier test fails. It broke due to a requirement change. Now s the time for that developer to realize that an older requirement has changed. That test is indeed no longer valid and served no real purpose. It was written for a requirement that is no longer valid.

There are two possible routed to go here:

-         Delete the failing test after verifying that it is longer valid

-         Change the old test

o       Either to test the new requirement

o       Or to test the older requirement under new settings

The highlighted line above indicates that this is an important case. Sometimes a test is still valid even if it uses non-valid ways to accomplish its task. A good example would be to have a Person class with a constructor that takes one parameter.

A test that creates this class to test some functionality of it is using this constructor.

Years later another requirement comes along and another parameter is added to the constructor of the class.

Suddenly the old test breaks, even though it has nothing to do with the constructor other than it needs to create the class in order to test its functionality.

Removing the test then becomes a bad thing because you lose testing of some important functionality. In that case you might  want to change the creation of the class in your old test so that you can keep using it for the purpose it was built for.

Assuming you have 200 failing tests just because they use that old constructor you might be in for a problem maintaining your tests. That s why you should always remove duplication in your tests just as you would in production code.
分享到:  QQ好友和群QQ好友和群 QQ空间QQ空间 腾讯微博腾讯微博 腾讯朋友腾讯朋友
收藏收藏
回复

使用道具 举报

本版积分规则

关闭

站长推荐上一条 /1 下一条

小黑屋|手机版|Archiver|51Testing软件测试网 ( 沪ICP备05003035号 关于我们

GMT+8, 2024-11-23 07:38 , Processed in 0.071004 second(s), 27 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.2

© 2001-2024 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表