NUnit vs Visual Studio 2010's MSTest?

Question

I realise that there are many older questions addressing the general question of NUnit v MSTest for versions of Visual Studio up to 2008 (such as this one).

Microsoft have a history of getting things right in their 3rd version. For MSTest, that is VS2010.

Have they done so with MSTest? Would you use it in a new project in preference to NUnit?

My specific concerns:

• speed
• running tests within CruiseControl.NET (either commandline or MSBuild task)
• code coverage reports from CC.NET
• can you run MSTest tests in debug mode

(We use ReSharper, so test-runners are not an issue for us. We have used NUnit for the last few years. We do not have TFS.)

Solution 1

• List item speed is same, but MsTest may be a bit slower because it creates folder for test run every time
• MSBuid and CC.Net is big pain. You can't run MSTest on computer without VS on it (not 100 sure about 2010, but with 2008 it is so)
• not sure, sorry
• yes you can, from visual studio

My recommendation is following: if NUnit satisfies you - use it, forget about MSTest

Solution 2

To correct some old information on the thread;

1. It IS possible to run 64 bit tests in 2010
2. From VS2008 forward it is not neccesary to have MSTEST create directories anc opy the binaries in, just disable deployment, in 2010 thats the default but you have to set it in 2008
3. 2010 MSTEST is faster but as its a generalised test framework that also runs load/web/UI tests there are compromises in the design that will lead to it being slower. Jamie Cansdale appears to have managed to get perf increases with the lastest releases of TestDriven.net's support for MSTEST

Solution 3

I've mainly used NUnit, some xUnit and some MSTest. They seem functionality equivalent, but I don't like the MSTest test runner. It runs in visual studio so it either crowds the screen or is on another monitor getting in the way everytime I tab to visual studio. (I run NUnit on another monitor, but it doesn't cover everything on that monitor everytime I focus visual studio). It takes too many clicks to find out what test failed and why.

NUnit can run in the background until a test fails, at which point it shows you information about the breaking test. This seems like the ideal for keeping red/green/refactor going smoothly.

Solution 4

Nope. Same issues regarding appdomains and assembly resolving still exist. I would avoid unless you want the new goodness for other functional testing or integration with Team System.

View more solutions

Comments

[Preet Sangha]

Concur with last statement.

[RichardOD]

@Preet. I agree. Also MSTest changes are tied to releases of Visual Studio

[Mas]

+1 for the last statement. I was on a project and we started unit testing with MSTest (2008). We got so annoyed with it, we switched over to NUnit. I'm using VS 2010, and there's not much improvement over VS 2008.

[AnneTheAgile]

A workaround is described here, rupertrawnsley.blogspot.com/2011/04/mstest-and-64bit.html , but it seems possibly a bit kludgy?