Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 8015057
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 4, 20262026-06-04T20:08:26+00:00 2026-06-04T20:08:26+00:00

Is there a way or approach like a method decorator or attribute for a

  • 0

Is there a way or approach like a method decorator or attribute for a test method that can say for example:

“Run Method C Before running Method B”

So basically you are creating a dependancy between C and B. I know tests are better off being atomic and should be but sometimes in it’s better to keep your tests small and to the point. It makes sense not run a ‘RemoveItem’ test method when the item it is looking for is simply not there.

Most people would add the item before hand and then test to see if they can remove – ‘All In the same test‘. I don’t like this approach and want to make my tests smaller, more to to point and more atomic as possible.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-04T20:08:27+00:00Added an answer on June 4, 2026 at 8:08 pm

    Like you said, you dont want interdependencies between your test. If you are not comfortable having an “Add” before the “Remove” in your remove test, thus testing the Add method in the wrong place, then I recommend using testInitialize to setup some objects the tests can act on. I do however recommend the practice of actually running Add before you run Remove, in the test of Remove.

    [Testclass]
    public class TestStacks
    {
      private Stack<string> emptyStack;
      private Stack<string> singleItemStack;
    
      [TestInitialize]
      public void Setup()
      {
        singleItemStack = new Stack<string>();
        singleItemStack.Push("Item");
        emptyStack = new Stack<string>();
      }
    
      [TestMethod]
      public void TestPush()
      {       
        emptyStack.Push("Added");
        Assert.AreEqual(1, emptyStack.Count);
      }
    
      [TestMethod]
      public void TestRemove()
      {       
        singleItemStack.Pop();
        Assert.AreEqual(0, singleItemStack.Count);
      }  
    
      [TestMethod]
      [ExpectedException(typeof(InvalidOperationException))]
      public void TestPopFromEmpty()
      {       
        emptyStack.Pop();
      }  
    
    }
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Is there way that I can read the file from remote server using fopen
Is there a way to run code BEFORE model retrieval? I know about the
I need to know if there's any way (or another distinct approach) to an
is there way how to get name ov event from Lambda expression like with
Is there a way you can add a column to the Details view of
1 - Method Chaining I really love the way you can call functions without
Is there a way to have a different Backbone.sync method invoked for a subset
Is there a way to know the number of test methods in a test
Let's say I have a JSONObject in GWT that looks like this: {name1:value1, name2:value2}
In Xcode 4.x is there a way to quickly add method stubs for a

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.