It seems that in order to be able to unit test a method it has to be
publicly accessible. Is there a way to use test/unit to test private methods
and instance variables?

Thanks,

I used to believe that Unit Testing would consider things in a black-box
approach. Can somebody comment on that?

You can however invoke private methods by using send
   someobject.send(:somemethod, *args)

as for the instance variables, you could get them doing

   assert_whatever ...

--
 _           _                            
| |__   __ _| |_ ___ _ __ ___   __ _ _ __  
| '_ \ / _` | __/ __| '_ ` _ \ / _` | '_ \
| |_) | (_| | |_\__ \ | | | | | (_| | | | |
|_.__/ \__,_|\__|___/_| |_| |_|\__,_|_| |_|
        Running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (unstable)
batsman dot geo at yahoo dot com

*** PUBLIC flooding detected from erikyyy
<lewnie> THAT's an erik, pholx.... ;)
        -- Seen on #LinuxGER

You can use instance_eval to subvert "private."  Though when I run
into this, I usually skip testing them.  After all, the private
methods do their job properly if all the public methods that use them
pass their tests.

class MyClass
  def private_method
    "private"
  end
  private :private_method
end

if $0 == __FILE__
  require 'test/unit'
  class TestMyClass < Test::Unit::TestCase
    def setup

    end
    def test_private_method

    end
  end
end

--
matt

Thinking on it again, I should have written
  "white-box approach testing only public methods"

Correct?

--
 _           _                            
| |__   __ _| |_ ___ _ __ ___   __ _ _ __  
| '_ \ / _` | __/ __| '_ ` _ \ / _` | '_ \
| |_) | (_| | |_\__ \ | | | | | (_| | | | |
|_.__/ \__,_|\__|___/_| |_| |_|\__,_|_| |_|
        Running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (unstable)
batsman dot geo at yahoo dot com

But what can you do with it?
        -- ubiquitous cry from Linux-user partner

I try to only test public methods, but sometimes run into a situation
where testing private methods is good.  This is generally when one
public method calls several large, implementation-heavy private
methods.  In this case, the private methods are important, and it's
easier to test them directly to build some confidence.

In which case

does the job.

I like the fact that you can call private methods, but the code for
doing so sticks out.

Gavin