你可以用两种方法对私有方法进行单元测试

you can create instance of PrivateObject class the syntax is as follows PrivateObject obj= new PrivateObject(PrivateClass); //now with this obj you can call the private method of PrivateCalss. obj.PrivateMethod("Parameters"); You can use reflection. PrivateClass obj = new PrivateClass(); // Class containing private obj Type t = typeof(PrivateClass); var x = t.InvokeMember("PrivateFunc", BindingFlags.InvokeMethod | BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance, null, obj, new object[] { 5 });

在极少数情况下，我想要测试私有函数，我通常会将它们修改为受保护的，并且我已经编写了一个带有公共包装器函数的子类。

类:

...

protected void APrivateFunction()
{
    ...
}

...

测试子类:

...

[Test]
public void TestAPrivateFunction()
{
    APrivateFunction();
    //or whatever testing code you want here
}

...

CC -Dprivate=public

“CC”是我使用的系统上的命令行编译器。-Dfoo=bar相当于#define foo bar。因此，这个编译选项有效地将所有私有内容更改为公共。

I don't agree with the "you should only be interested in testing the external interface" philosophy. It's a bit like saying that a car repair shop should only have tests to see if the wheels turn. Yes, ultimately I'm interested in the external behavior but I like my own, private, internal tests to be a bit more specific and to the point. Yes, if I refactor, I may have to change some of the tests, but unless it's a massive refactor, I'll only have to change a few and the fact that the other (unchanged) internal tests still work is a great indicator that the refactoring has been successful.

You can try to cover all internal cases using only the public interface and theoretically it's possible to test every internal method (or at least every one that matters) entirely by using the public interface but you may have to end up standing on your head to achieve this and the connection between the test cases being run through the public interface and the internal portion of the solution they're designed to test may be difficult or impossible to discern. Having pointed, individual tests that guarantee that the internal machinery is working properly is well worth the minor test changes that come about with refactoring - at least that's been my experience. If you have to make huge changes to your tests for every refactoring, then maybe this doesn't make sense, but in that case, maybe you ought to rethink your design entirely. A good design should be flexible enough to allow for most changes without massive redesigns.

JAVA语言

在这里，您可以使用模拟行为覆盖测试类的特定方法。

对于下面的代码:

public class ClassToTest 
{
    public void methodToTest()
    {
        Integer integerInstance = new Integer(0);
        boolean returnValue= methodToMock(integerInstance);
        if(returnValue)
        {
            System.out.println("methodToMock returned true");
        }
        else
        {
            System.out.println("methodToMock returned true");
        }
        System.out.println();
    }
    private boolean methodToMock(int value)
    {
        return true;
    }
}

测试类将是:

public class ClassToTestTest{

    @Test
    public void testMethodToTest(){

        new Mockup<ClassToTest>(){
            @Mock
            private boolean methodToMock(int value){
                return true;
            }
        };

        ....    

    }
}

将它们声明为内部的，然后使用InternalsVisibleToAttribute允许单元测试程序集看到它们。