Re: Assume

> All I'm saying here is that if you have
> 
> [ExpectedException(typeof(InvalidCastException))]
> 
> And the test passes, all you know is that some line of code caused an
> invalid cast exception to be thrown.  I supposed you can have some
> degree of certainty that the line you wanted to throw the exception
did,
> but I don't know of a way to enforce that.
> 
> Compare that too this:
> 
> public void foo()
> {
>     //Do some stuff here
> 
>     try
>     {
>         DoSomethingThatThrowsAnException();
> 
>         Assert.Fail("Exception not Thrown");
>     }
>     catch (InvalidCastException ex)
>     {
>         //Do Nothing...Swallow it
>     }
> }
> 
> 
> In this case, you know exactly which line of code raised the
exception.
> I'm not saying it's easier to maintain - To be 100% clear, I remove
this
> second example of code and replace it with the first when I see it, as
> do you.  My point is that you have a bit more certainty that what
> happened is what you expected with this example, for better or for
worse.
> 

[cliff] this doesn't seem any different than 
[ExpectedException]
Public void foo()
{
DoSomethingThatThrowsAnException();
}

It says the same and with less code and IMHO is more clearer.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/