﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Ayende @ Rahien</title><link>http://ayende.com</link><description>Ayende @ Rahien</description><copyright>Copyright (C) Ayende Rahien  2004 - 2021 (c) 2026</copyright><ttl>60</ttl><item><title>Ayende Rahien commented on Reusable tests</title><description>@Shane,
  
That is a good argument against it that I have no considered.
  
I'll give it some more thought.
  
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2127/reusable-tests#comment2</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2127/reusable-tests#comment2</guid><pubDate>Fri, 23 Feb 2007 07:05:25 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title>Shane Courtrille commented on Reusable tests</title><description>While I understand where you're coming from I definitely disagree strongly with how you got there.  I personally would be worried about the fact that my one test is now dependent on another test for certain behavior.  This of course creates the restriction on the first test that it needs to keep doing what it's doing.  Now this is a fairly simple example and you are most likely going to be safe.  But if you make a habit of this I'd be amazed if it didn't bite you in the ass over time.
  
  
Love the blog btw :)
</description><link>http://ayende.com/2127/reusable-tests#comment1</link><guid>http://ayende.com/2127/reusable-tests#comment1</guid><pubDate>Fri, 23 Feb 2007 00:13:20 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>