Comments on: Unit Testing Interfaces with xUnit Theories http://www.ademiller.com/blogs/tech/2009/06/unit-testing-interfaces-with-xunit-theories/?&owa_from=feed&owa_sid= Thinking about agile (small 'a') software development, patterns and practices for building Microsoft .NET applications. Wed, 10 Mar 2010 23:02:38 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Twitted by bentayloruk http://www.ademiller.com/blogs/tech/2009/06/unit-testing-interfaces-with-xunit-theories/comment-page-1/#comment-784 Twitted by bentayloruk Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:54:29 +0000 http://www.ademiller.com/blogs/tech/2009/06/unit-testing-interfaces-with-xunit-theories/#comment-784 [...] This post was Twitted by bentayloruk - Real-url.org [...]

[...] This post was Twitted by bentayloruk – Real-url.org [...]

]]> By: Emperor XLII http://www.ademiller.com/blogs/tech/2009/06/unit-testing-interfaces-with-xunit-theories/comment-page-1/#comment-783 Emperor XLII Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:48:22 +0000 http://www.ademiller.com/blogs/tech/2009/06/unit-testing-interfaces-with-xunit-theories/#comment-783 I created something similar a while back that uses reflection to find appropriate instances for each method argument. For your example, you could specify a single [InstanceData] instead of multiple [InlineConstructorData(...)] attributes (though I admit your method is clearer :). Also supports non-default constructors generic methods. http://typeresolver.codeplex.com/ I created something similar a while back that uses reflection to find appropriate instances for each method argument. For your example, you could specify a single [InstanceData] instead of multiple [InlineConstructorData(...)] attributes (though I admit your method is clearer :). Also supports non-default constructors generic methods.

http://typeresolver.codeplex.com/

]]>