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

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • 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 902415
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 15, 20262026-05-15T15:42:45+00:00 2026-05-15T15:42:45+00:00

Is there any reason to put object creation inside of setUp() rather than at

  • 0

Is there any reason to put object creation inside of setUp() rather than at an instance variable declaration?

I’ve seen it done this way in books, but the effect is the same and I’m not sure if it was done for a best practice reason, because an earlier version of Junit did not instantiate the object for each test (see here), or if it’s just a style thing.

  • 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
    2026-05-15T15:42:46+00:00Added an answer on May 15, 2026 at 3:42 pm

    If the instantiation of the object in question does not depend on external factors, it is perfectly OK to declare and define it at once. However, often it depends on other factors (e.g. initialization of a singleton*), or requires constructor parameters – some of which may even be test-dependent -, or its initialization takes multiple steps. Then you have to defer instantiation to the setup method, or even to the test method itself.

    Note that JUnit creates a new instance of the test class, thus a new instance of its data members for each test method execution anyway. So if you have none of the dependencies mentioned above, semantically there is no difference between instantiating a member at the point of declaration or in the setup method.

    *this is one of the reasons Singletons are not liked. However, often you still have them, especially in legacy code.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Is there any reason not to use the bitwise operators &, |, and ^
Is there any reason something like this would not work? This is the logic
Is there any reason why I should pick JSON over XML, or vice-versa if
Is there any reason to use a varchar field instead of a date field
Is there any reason to start a GUI program (application for Windows) written in
Is there any reason for the use of 'T' in generics? Is it some
Is there any reason to prefer a CharBuffer to a char[] in the following:
Is there any reason to prefer unicode(somestring, 'utf8') as opposed to somestring.decode('utf8') ? My
Is there any reason not to set up the install so that major upgrade
Is there any reason why XML such as this : <person> <firstname>Joe</firstname> <lastname>Plumber</lastname> </person>

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.