Identify and fix these four common mistakes when writing your first unit tests. Learn one of these four naming conventions and stick to it. Don’t worry about long test names.
Find these first three posts plus a summary of "The Art of Unit Testing" and my best tips from this series on my free ebook “Unit Testing 101”. Download your free copy on my Gumroad page or click on the image below.
When writing your unit tests, make sure you don’t duplicate logic in Asserts. That’s THE most common mistake in unit testing. Tests should only contain assignments and method calls.
Strive for a set of always-passing tests, a “Safe Green Zone.” For example, use a culture when parsing numeric strings, instead of relying on a default culture on developers’ machines.
If you want to practice writing some unit tests, check my Unit Testing 101 repository on GitHub.
Ready to upgrade your unit testing skills? Write readable and maintainable unit test with my course Mastering C# Unit Testing with Real-world Examples on Udemy. Learn unit testing best practices while refactoring real unit tests from my past projects. No tests for a Calculator class.
Last time, we went through some best practices to write better assertions on our tests. This time, let’s focus on how to use custom assertions to improve the readability of our tests.
Use custom assertions to encapsulate multiple assertions on a single method and express them in the same language as the domain model. Write custom assertions with local methods or extension methods on the result object of the tested method or on the fake objects.
We can either create custom assertions on top of the MSTest Assert class. And, our own Verify methods on Moq mocks.
To write custom assertions with MSTest, write an extension method on top of the Assert class. Then, compare the expected and actual parameters and throw an AssertFailedException if the comparison fails.
Let’s create a StringIsEmpty() method,
publicstaticclassCustomAssert{publicstaticvoidStringIsEmpty(thisAssertassert,stringactual){if(string.IsNullOrEmpty(actual)){return;}thrownewAssertFailedException($"Expect empty string but was {actual}");}}
Then, we can use StringIsEmpty() with the That property. Like this,
Assert.That.StringIsEmpty("");
With this custom assertion in place, we can rewrite the Assert part of our tests for the Stringie Remove method. Like this,
With custom assertions, like StringIsEmpty(), we can write our assertions using the same vocabulary from our business domain.
2. How to write custom Moq Verify method
If we’re using Moq, we can create our custom Verify() methods too.
Let’s write some tests for an API client. This time, we have a payment processing system and we want to provide our users a user-friendly client to call our endpoints.
We want to test that our methods call the right API endpoints. If we change the client version number, we should include the version number in the endpoint URL.
We could write some unit tests like these ones,
usingMicrosoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting;usingMoq;usingSystem;usingSystem.Threading.Tasks;namespaceCustomAssertions;[TestClass]publicclassPaymentProxyTests{[TestMethod]publicasyncTaskPayAsync_ByDefault_CallsLatestVersion(){varfakeClient=newMock<IApiClient>();varproxy=newPaymentProxy(fakeClient.Object);awaitproxy.PayAsync(AnyPaymentRequest);// Here we verify we called the right urlfakeClient.Verify(x=>x.PostAsync<PaymentRequest,ApiResult>(// ^^^^^It.Is<Uri>(t=>t.AbsoluteUri.Contains("/v2/pay",StringComparison.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase)),It.IsAny<PaymentRequest>()),Times.Once);}[TestMethod]publicasyncTaskPayAsync_VersionNumber_CallsEndpointWithVersion(){varfakeClient=newMock<IApiClient>();varproxy=newPaymentProxy(fakeClient.Object,Version.V1);awaitproxy.PayAsync(AnyPaymentRequest);// Here we verify we called the right url againfakeClient.Verify(x=>x.PostAsync<PaymentRequest,ApiResult>(// ^^^^^ It.Is<Uri>(t=>t.AbsoluteUri.Contains("/v1/pay",StringComparison.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase)),It.IsAny<PaymentRequest>()),Times.Once);}privatePaymentRequestAnyPaymentRequest=>newPaymentRequest{// All initializations here...};}
Notice, the Verify() methods in the two tests. Did you notice how buried inside all that boilerplate is the URL we want to check? That’s what we’re interested in. It would be nice if we had a VerifyItCalled() method and we just passed a string or URI with the URL we want.
Let’s create an extension method on top of our fake. Let’s write the VerifyItCalled() method we want. It will receive a relative URL and call Moq Verify() method. Something like this,
With our VerifyItCalled() in place, let’s refactor our tests to use it,
usingMicrosoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting;usingMoq;usingSystem.Threading.Tasks;namespaceCustomAssertions;[TestClass]publicclassPaymentProxyTests{[TestMethod]publicasyncTaskPayAsync_ByDefault_CallsLatestVersion(){varfakeClient=newMock<IApiClient>();varproxy=newPaymentProxy(fakeClient.Object);awaitproxy.PayAsync(AnyPaymentRequest);// Now, it's way more readablefakeClient.VerifyItCalled("/v2/pay");// ^^^^^}[TestMethod]publicasyncTaskPayAsync_VersionNumber_CallsEndpointWithVersion(){varfakeClient=newMock<IApiClient>();varproxy=newPaymentProxy(fakeClient.Object,Version.V1);awaitproxy.PayAsync(AnyPaymentRequest);// No more boilerplate code to check thingsfakeClient.VerifyItCalled("/v1/pay");// ^^^^^}privatePaymentRequestAnyPaymentRequest=>newPaymentRequest{// All initializations here...};}
With our custom Verify() method, our tests are more readable. And, we wrote the tests in the same terms as our domain language. No more ceremony to check we called the right url.
Voilà! That’s how to use custom assertions to write tests in the same terms as your domain model.
In case you have plain assertions, not Verify() methods with Moq, simply write private methods to group your assertions and share them in a base test class. Or write extension methods on the output of the method being tested. For more details on this technique, check xUnitPatterns on Custom Assertions.
Let’s refactor a test to follow our unit testing best practices. This test is based on a real test I had to modify in one of my client’s projects.
Imagine this test belongs to a payment gateway. The system takes payments on behalf of partners. At the end of every month, the partners get the collected payments discounting any fees. This process is called a payout.
Partners can generate a report with all the transactions associated with a payout. This report can show dates at a different timezone if the user wants it.
This is the test we’re going to refactor. This test is for the GetPayoutDetailsAsync() method. This method finds the payouts in a date range. Then, it shows all transactions related to those payouts. This method feeds a report in Microsoft Excel or any other spreadsheet software.
Also, this test uses the Builder pattern to create fakes with some test values before building a new instance. This test relies on object mothers to create input values for the stubs.
To achieve this, let’s declare variables near their first use and inline the ones used in a single place.
[TestMethod]publicasyncTaskGetPayoutDetailsAsync_HappyPath_SuccessWithoutTimezone(){// Notice we inlined all input variablesvarbuilder=newTypeBuilder<PayoutDetailsService>().WithAccount(TestAccount).WithPayouts(TestPayouts).WithBalanceTransactions(TestBalanceTransactions).WithPayments(TestPayments);varservice=builder.Build();// Notice we moved the request variable near its first usevarrequest=newPayoutRequest{PageSize=10,AccountId="AnyAccountId",DateRange=newDateRange{StartDate=DateTime.Now.AddDays(-15),EndDate=DateTime.Now}};varresult=awaitservice.GetPayoutDetailsAsync(request);Assert.IsTrue(result.Any());builder.GetMock<IAccountService>().Verify(s=>s.GetAsync(It.IsAny<string>()),Times.Once);builder.GetMock<IPayoutWrapper>().Verify(s=>s.GetPayoutsByDateRangeAsync(It.IsAny<string>(),It.IsAny<DateRange>()),Times.Once);builder.GetMock<IBalanceTransactionWrapper>().Verify(s=>s.GetBalanceTransactionsByPayoutsAsync(It.IsAny<string>(),It.IsAny<string>(),It.IsAny<CancellationToken>()),Times.Once);}
Notice we inlined all input variables and move the request variable closer to the GetPayoutDetailsAsync() method where it’s used.
Remember, declare variables near their first use.
2. Show the scenario under test and the expected result
Now, let’s look at the test name.
[TestMethod]publicasyncTaskGetPayoutDetailsAsync_HappyPath_SuccessWithoutTimezone(){// Notice the test name...// The rest of the test remains the same,// but not for too long}
It states the GetPayoutDetailsAsync() method should work without a timezone. That’s the scenario of our test.
Also, let’s avoid the filler word “Success”. In this test, success means the method returns the details without showing the transactions in another timezone. We learned to avoid filler words in our test names when we learned the 4 common mistakes when writing tests.
Let’s rename our test.
[TestMethod]publicasyncTaskGetPayoutDetailsAsync_NoTimeZone_ReturnsDetails(){// Test body remains the same...}
After this refactoring, it’s a good idea to add another test passing a timezone and checking that the found transactions are in the same timezone.
3. Make test value obvious
In the previous refactor, we renamed our test to show it works without a timezone.
Anyone reading this test should expect a variable named timezone assigned to null or a method WithoutTimeZone() in a builder. Let’s make the test value explicit.
[TestMethod]publicasyncTaskGetPayoutDetailsAsync_NoTimeZone_ReturnsDetails(){varbuilder=newTypeBuilder<PayoutDetailsService>().WithAccount(TestAccount).WithPayouts(TestPayouts).WithBalanceTransactions(TestBalanceTransactions).WithPayments(TestPayments);varservice=builder.Build();varrequest=newPayoutRequest{PageSize=10,AccountId="AnyAccountId",DateRange=newDateRange{StartDate=DateTime.Now.AddDays(-15),EndDate=DateTime.Now},// Notice we explicitly set no timezoneTimeZone=null// ^^^^^};varresult=awaitservice.GetPayoutDetailsAsync(request);Assert.IsTrue(result.Any());builder.GetMock<IAccountService>().Verify(s=>s.GetAsync(It.IsAny<string>()),Times.Once);builder.GetMock<IPayoutWrapper>().Verify(s=>s.GetPayoutsByDateRangeAsync(It.IsAny<string>(),It.IsAny<DateRange>()),Times.Once);builder.GetMock<IBalanceTransactionWrapper>().Verify(s=>s.GetBalanceTransactionsByPayoutsAsync(It.IsAny<string>(),It.IsAny<string>(),It.IsAny<CancellationToken>()),Times.Once);}
If we have more than one test without a timezone, we can use a constant NoTimeZome or an object mother for the PayoutRequest, something like NoTimeZonePayoutRequest.
If any of the stubs weren’t in place, probably we will get a NullReferenceException somewhere in our code. Those extra verifications make our test harder to maintain.
[TestMethod]publicasyncTaskGetPayoutDetailsAsync_NoTimeZone_ReturnsDetails(){varbuilder=newTypeBuilder<PayoutDetailsService>().WithAccount(TestAccount).WithPayouts(TestPayouts).WithBalanceTransactions(TestBalanceTransactions).WithPayments(TestPayments);varservice=builder.Build();varrequest=newPayoutRequest{PageSize=10,AccountId="AnyAccountId",DateRange=newDateRange{StartDate=DateTime.Now.AddDays(-15),EndDate=DateTime.Now},TimeZone=null};varresult=awaitservice.GetPayoutDetailsAsync(request);Assert.IsTrue(result.Any());// We stopped verifying on stubs}
Voilà! That looks better! Unit tests got our back when changing our code. It’s better to keep them clean too. They are our safety net.
There’s a lot to say about how to write good unit tests. This time, let’s focus on best practices to write better assertions on our tests.
Here you have 5 tips to write better assertions on your unit tests.
TL;DR
Follow the Arrange/Act/Assert (AAA) pattern
Separate each A of the AAA pattern with line breaks
Don’t put logic in your assertions
Have a single Act and Assert parts in each test
Use the right Assertion methods
1. Follow the Arrange/Act/Assert (AAA) pattern
If you could take home only one thing: follow the Arrange/Act/Assert (AAA) pattern.
The Arrange/Act/Assert (AAA) pattern states that each test should contain three parts: Arrange, Act and Assert.
In the Arrange part, we create classes and input values needed to call the entry point of the code under test.
In the Act part, we call the method to trigger the logic being tested.
In the Assert part, we verify the code under test did what we expected. We check if it returned the right value, threw an exception, or called another component.
For example, let’s bring back one test for Stringie, a (fictional) library to manipulate strings, to show the AAA pattern. Notice how each test has these 3 parts.
For the sake of the example, we have put comments in each AAA part. You don’t need to do that on your own tests.
Not that bad. The larger the tests, the harder it gets.
Have the three AAA parts separated to make your tests easier to read.
In case you’re wondering about those weird method names, they follow one of the most common test naming conventions.
3. Don’t put logic in your assertions
Don’t repeat the logic under test in your assertions. And, please, don’t copy the tested logic and paste it into private methods in your test files to use it in your assertions. That’s the most common mistake when writing tests.
Use known, pre-calculated values instead. Declare constants for common expected values.
[TestMethod]publicvoidRemove_ASubstring_RemovesThatSubstringFromTheEnd(){stringstr="Hello, world! Again, Hello";stringtransformed=str.Remove("Hello").From(The.End);Assert.AreEqual("Hello, world! Again,",transformed);// ^^^^^// Notice how we hardcode an expected value here}
Notice how we hardcoded an expected value in the Assert part. We didn’t use any other method or copy the logic under test to find the expected substring.
4. Have a single Act and Assert
Have a single Act and Assert parts in your tests. Use parameterized tests to test the same scenario with different test values.
And, don’t put the test values inside an array to loop through it to then assert on each value.
Use the right assertion methods of your testing framework. And, don’t roll your own assertion framework.
For example, prefer Assert.IsNull(result); over Assert.AreEqual(null, result);. And, prefer Assert.IsTrue(result) over Assert.AreEqual(true, result);.
When working with strings, prefer StringAssert methods like Contains(), StartsWith() and Matches() instead of exactly comparing two strings. That would make your tests easier to maintain.
This time, I’m bringing some tips and best practices from my previous posts in one single place for quick reference.
1. On Naming
Choose a naming convention and stick to it.
Every test name should tell the scenario under test and the expected result. Don’t worry about long test names. But don’t name your tests: Test1, Test2, and so on.
Describe in your test names what you’re testing in a language easy to understand, even for non-programmers.
Don’t prefix your test names with “Test.” If you’re using a testing framework that doesn’t need keywords in your test names, don’t do that. With MSTest, there are attributes like [TestClass] and [TestMethod] to mark methods as tests. Other testing frameworks have similar ones.
Don’t use filler words like “Success” or “IsCorrect” in test names. Instead, tell what “success” and “correct” mean for that test. Is it a successful test because it doesn’t throw exceptions? Is it successful because it returns a value different from null? Make your test names easy to understand.
2. On Organization
Make your tests easy to find.
Put your unit tests in a test project named after the project they test. Use the suffix “Tests” or “UnitTests.” For example, if you have a library called MyLibrary, name your test project: MyLibrary.UnitTests.
Put your unit tests separated in files named after the unit of work or entry point of the code you’re testing. Use the suffix “Tests”. For a class MyClass, name your test file: MyClassTests.
3. On Assertions
Follow the Arrange/Act/Assert (AAA) principle.
Separate the body of your tests. Use line breaks to visually separate the three AAA parts in the body of your tests.
Don’t repeat the logic under test in your assertions. And, please, don’t copy the tested logic and paste it into private methods in your test files to use it in your assertions. Use known or pre-calculated values, instead.
Don’t make private methods public to test them. Test private methods when calling your code under test through its public methods.
Have a single Act and Assert parts in your tests. Don’t put test values inside a collection to loop through it and assert on each one. Use parameterized tests to test the same scenario with different test values.
Use the right assertion methods of your testing framework. For example, use Assert.IsNull(result); instead of Assert.AreEqual(null, result);.
Prefer assertion methods for strings like Contains(), StartsWith() and Matches() instead of exactly comparing two strings.
4. On Test Data
Keep the amount of details at the right level
Give enough details to your readers, but not too many to make your tests noisy.
Use factory methods to reduce complex Arrange scenarios.
Make your scenario under test and test values extremely obvious. Don’t make developers decode your tests. Create constants for common test data and expected values.
Use object mothers to create input test values. Have a factory method or property holding a ready-to-use input object. Then, change what you need to match the scenario under test.
Prefer Builders to create complex object graphs. Object mothers are fine if you don’t have lots of variations of the object being constructed. If that’s the case, use the Builder pattern. Compose builders to create complex objects in your tests.
5. On Stubs and Mocks
Write dumb fakes
Use fakes when you depend on external systems you don’t control. Check your code makes the right calls with the right messages.
Avoid complex logic inside your fakes. Don’t add flags to your stubs to return one value or another. Write separate stubs instead.
Keep one mock per test. Don’t use multiple mocks per test. Write separate tests instead.
Make tests set their own values for fakes. Avoid magic values inside your stubs.
Use descriptive names in your fakes. Name your stubs to indicate the value they return or the exception they throw. For example, ItemOutOfStockStockService and FixedDateClock.
Voilà! Those are my best practices for writing better great unit tests. Don’t forget to always start writing failing tests. And make sure they fail for the right reasons. If you don’t follow Test-Driven Development, comment out some of your code under test or change the assertions on purpose to see your tests failing.
We don’t ship our tests to end users. But it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t care about the quality of our tests. Unit tests got our back when changing our code. They’re our safety net.
Don’t miss the rest of my Unit Testing 101 series where I cover all these subjects in depth.
Ready to upgrade your unit testing skills? Write readable and maintainable unit test with my course Mastering C# Unit Testing with Real-world Examples on Udemy. Learn unit testing best practices while refactoring real unit tests from my past projects. No tests for a Calculator class.