Rhino Mocks: AAA vs Record- Playback

Rhino Mocks is one of my favourite pieces of open source software. It has, more than any other piece of code, changed the way I code, for the better, I hope.
Many moons ago I first played with it and like the fact it was strongly typed, NMock2 was the mock framework I was using at the time and it is string based, which can lead to havoc when refactoring.
Back in those days RhinoMocks was only Record-Playback and to be honest it never felt natural to me. Due to popular demand the framework was extended to allow for either the record play back or IMO the more natural AAA syntax

Arrange - Act - Assert

Arrange, Act, Assert to me help break up the way I write my test to make it very clear what I am trying to achieve. I even have code snippets that auto populate my test. I type "mstest" and i get

[TestMethod]
public void Can()
{
   //Arrange
   //Act
   //Assert
   Assert.Inconclusive("Test not completed");
}

I also feel this allows newcomer to see what is going on more clearly and also helps them write test first.
How?
Well, in my mind the hardest thing to do when starting TDD is knowing what to write! If you have the code stub with comments as above, it gives you a visual guide to nudge you into progress.

I also find it helps if n00bs actually write the ACT part first, not the ARRANGE. Typically this involves writing 2 lines of code

• create the object and


• call the method you want to test

eg:

[TestMethod]
public void CanValidateCustomerFromCustomerAddPresenter()
{
    //Arrange
    //Act
    var presenter = new CustomerPresenter(view,service);
    presenter.Validate(customer);
    //Assert
    Assert.Inconclusive("Test not completed");
}

The fact the above code wont even compile is irrelevant. It shows intent. Now the developer writing the test has a clear direction of what they need to do. Often this way of TDD fleshes out new tests. To me this (incomplete and fictitious) test straight away is crying out for complimentary tests: eg CanNotValidateCustomerFromCustomerAddPresenterWithNullCustomer etc etc
The fact that I have not even defined what a customer is, means my mind is still open to possibilities.
On top of the benefits of writing the ACT first, I think AAA syntax makes the test more readable in terms of maintaining code bases, as it has the top down procedural look that coders are used to (even OO has top down).

[TestMethod]
public void CanValidateCustomerFromCustomerAddPresenter()
{
   //Arrange - Set up mocks (put in your TestInitialize)
   var view = MockRepository.GenerateMock<IView>();
   var service = MockRepository.GenerateMock<IService>();
   //Arrange - Set up your parameters & return objects
   var customer = TestFactory.CreateVaildCustomer();
   //Arrange - Set up your expectations on your mocks
   view.Expect(v=>v.ShowValidation(customer));
   service.Expect(s=>s.Validate(customer)).Return(ValidationFactory.Success);
   //Act
   var presenter = new CustomerPresenter(view,service);
   presenter.Validate(customer);
   //Assert
   view.VerifyAllExpectations();
   service.VerifyAllExpectations();
}

Now I have not run this thru a compiler I just threw this down, but to me this is pretty readable. I used Record-playback only for a few months and found it a little confusing, perhaps my pitiful little brain was maxing out on simple syntax, but hey.
If you are not using AAA try it out, it works great with the C# lambda expressions too (as above) which, to me, means you have incredibly readable tests.

*please ignore the fact the test is odd.. I am trying to show readability as opposed to how to write a crap object ;)
**is it incredibly obvious that i am writing MVP triplets ? ;)