This post may be terse and may possibly contain profanity. I’ve just wasted nearly a day and a half before solving this problem.

I have Project….Lets call it Project “P”. Big project, .NET 1.1. Nasty stuff at the best of times.
Project A has a dependency on an internal framework project (Dependency “D”).

For the last 2 days, whenever i try and run a unit test using NUnit/TestDriven/ReSharper, my tests are littered with failures like this:

    TestCase ‘ProjectP.Test.Data.Documents.MemberAuthentication_Tests.Can_Confirm_Registration’
    failed: System.TypeLoadException : Could not load type DependencyD.ISomeInterface from assembly DependencyD.Framework, Version=, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=8c4881879956f3a5.
    at ProjectP.Test.Utility.TestUtility_For_People..ctor()
    d:projectsClientProjectClient.websitetrunkProjectP.testingdatapeopleMemberAuthentication_Tests.cs(92,0): at ProjectP.Test.Data.Documents.MemberAuthentication_Tests.Can_Confirm_Registration()

After clearing my local temp and my c:windows temp, i was still getting this error.
After deleting all bin/obj directories in my project, i was still getting this error.
After deleting all known references to “DependencyD.dll” from my system, i was still getting this error.
After lots of googling, nothing turned up which would give me ANY indication that this was a problem.

To solve the problem, I attached the debugger to one of the tests as it ran and looked at the debug output window as it was loading each of the referenced assemblies…here’s what i saw:

    C:Documents and Settingsxerxes.battiwallaLocal SettingsApplication Dataassemblydl2GK3YAWO1.PD9R117AEJZ.3263cf8f4b19a0818d9_d632c801DependencyD.dll

wtf? WTF is that directory and why is my dll there? some different Googling and i found the answer. Shadow Copy Cache is a feature of ASP.NET it seems which is the cause of my problems. I wont go into detail about what SCC is, but in a few words, it’s a private copy of all your DLLs for ASP.NET to use so that you don’t get sharing violation problems when your website code is changed.

Deleting the SCC directory and all its contents suddenly make my tests pass, and the world seems brighter once more. I cant FU**ING believe that was the problem. So obscure, i’d never heard of it.

I hope that this entry gets indexed by the search crawlers….i was unlucky in finding anything about this problem by searching for things like “TestDriven TypeLoadException” or “Could not load type from assembly wrong version”, i just dont want the same thing to happen again (or to anyone else).


Recently, i’ve been looking more into TDD and mocking in particular.

I’m well versed with TDD and unit testing in general, and although i’ve dabbled in mocking before with NMock, i never really pursued it deeper; probably based on the combination of a number factors:

  • The product i was working on had it’s own in-house, custom-built ORM/OPF which wasn’t interface driven
  • There were patterns for testing code based on the aforementioned OPF which didn’t lend themselves for mocking too easily

Either way, i’ve sunk my teeth deep into it, and one thing that irked me about mocking was why I always seem to be mocking interface implementations and not concrete classes. From my (limited) understanding of how mocking frameworks work, one would assume that the definition of an object exposed through public methods on a concrete type would still allow you to mock the object. In a nutshell, i was wondering why can’t i mock my concrete classes?

Lets use an example (apologies if there are compile errors – i’m doing this off the top of my head)….I’m writing a class to perform calculations (uninspiringly named “Calculator”). I realise it’s a trivial example, so lets make it interesting by saying that the actual calculation logic won’t be handled by my application – it will be handled by a 3rd party object called SuperCalculator which takes the calculation and runs it across an array of supercomputers. As developers, we don’t care about the implementation of the SuperCalculator, only its interface.

So my code would look something like this:


Now to test this using standard mocking techniques, I would need to pray that there is an interface for the SuperCalculator type


…and the concrete class would be updated to use the interface definition (note the use of setter injection for mocking – i could have just as easily used constructor injection…)


…and then your unit test starts making a mockery based on the interface (Rhino mocks and .NET 1.1 used here, but using generic params is just as cool)….


phew…lot of code, but we got there. Now getting back to what irks me. The fact that we had to PRAY for an interface ISuperCalculator ortherwise we couldn’t mock out the dependency. And when you’re at the hands of a 3rd party library, who knows what you’re going to get.

So my questions came to – “is it possible to mock based on the concrete class?”….a bit of light Googling indicates it is possible, but only if you create a superclass of your concrete implementation and override all “public” methods which would now mean that they all have to be virtual by default, otherwise your test will end up calling code with undesirable results.

Why can’t the mocking framework take a concrete implementation, and mock it based on its public interface? The framework knows the interface to the object via reflection (and with VS2008, the intellisense is damn intelligent by allowing you to extend it), so why can’t it Reflection.Emit() all the necessary members (public/protected) and you can avoid the pain of hoping for an interface for a class that’s out of your control?

The other approach to it is to use a service proxy, and proxy all of the calls to SuperComputer through your OWN class MySuperComputer, which requires you to hand code the interface to SuperComputer, expose an IMySuperComputer, and then mock that….You’re hardly achieving anything though, because you’re just pushing the untestable dependency further down.

ramble ramble….if anyone has a thought on the matter, i’d like to hear it. I’m keen on continuing to use mocks, and certainly believe that implementing interfaces is good practice, but when the code you’re trying to mock is out of your control, what do you do?

hmm….after looking at this article it seems to explain one reason why you can’t create a pure mock from a concrete class…


    Dynamic mock object tools like NMock or Rhino Mocks can only override virtual methods. This might not be so much a problem in other languages, but with the .Net languages all methods are non-virtual by default. This means that some of the behavior that you were trying to remove from the test with a mock is still there. The dynamic mock libraries work by using Reflection.Emit to create a dynamic proxy on the fly for the requested interface or abstract class.


Maybe its the old version of CCNET we’re using, but please be wary of this problem.

After recovering space on the aforementioned drive, you’ll get the following message in the CC dashboard:

Unable to read the specified saved state. The configuration data may be invalid

The solution is to rebuild the content of your .state files for each project affected….And you’ll know which projects are affected because the dang state file is 0 bytes.

Google is your friend.

In Visual Studio 2005 SP1, the new “web-application” project type was introduced. This project type allowed us to have a csproj for the website project and suddenly we were in control of the content of a project and integrating it into an automated build process became simple.

However the best reason for wanting to ditch the old school website project in favour of the web-application project was not needing to bind the project to an IIS website. With an ASP.NET website project, the website project itself needs to be bound to a corresponding website under IIS, which is a real PITA, particularly when you don’t have the necessary environment set up.

So with VS2005 SP1 and web-application projects, all these problems are a thing of the past, right? Wrong, it seems.

I was opening one of our projects written by a contractor and it looks like he’s somehow managed to re-introduce project-website binding in a web-application project. Don’t know how, but whenever the project is opened, if it couldn’t connect to the project’s website running on localhost, it would throw a COM Interop Exception.

Simple solution – remove IIS website binding. It’s unnecessary and provides no benefit if your deployment process is handled outside Visual Studio. Open up the .csproj file, and remove the <ProjectExtensions> element and its children.

Problem solved.

Wow….first time ever that i can recall an installation of a Microsoft product working with zero interaction after clicking the last “go” button.

Well done MS. First time i’ve ever been able to walk away from my computer and not worry about installation interrupts.


  1. Make sure you test your changes. end to end.
  2. Make sure you write unit tests to cover your code. Every possible line
  3. And for the love of God, don’t ask me to review your work when you haven’t taken the time to test it yourself. Not only do you waste my time, but you waste YOUR time which could be spent fixing the problems I discovered anyway.

I’m just about close enough to join Outland….after my 4 months hiatus from WoW, ive basically power levelled my way from 45 to 57 (soon to be 58) in order to catch up with the others.

and then once i’m 70, with PVP gear, i’ll blow the priest away and try a class which can actually tank. stupid cloth armor.

Here i am on the armory.

There are a number of good pages which explain how to enable permalinks and rewrite rules for WordPress, such as:

None of them mentioned my problem – the main apache conf for the website had the setting AllowOverride None.

Hence my .htaccess wasn’t being honoured, hence my redirects weren’t working (and resulted in 404’s). Hence i ripped a clump of my hair out.

gah. hopefully someone stumbles across this and doesn’t waste as much time as i did.

In case i forget or lose the details on how i can post code in my blogs, here it is:

WordPress doesn’t allow you to post HTML code directly into your blogs. Sucks.

A bit of googling turned up embed-it. This WP plugin allows you to post HTML code into your blog. it does using the concept of “Custom Fields”. Essentially they’re parameters in the blog entry which get replaced by whatever code you want on-the-fly..

This frustrates me though because i blog using Drivel in an attempt to make blogging faster and therefore motivate to do it more often. And drivel has no support for this, and i doubt the wordpress RPC interface does either.

oh finally, the C# code formatter – awesome.

wow – I’ve just finished cleaning up a project conversion gone massively awry.

The proejct was originally in classic ASP, but over the years, people have extended it with ASP.NET parts (in this case, webservices).

The hosting provider was asked to configure the main root-folder of the website in IIS6 as a standard website, but a special request was made to the sub-directories into ASP.NET web-application folders.

…and of course here i come cleaning up the entire solution and migrating the classic ASP code to .NET and my deployments all break. why? because the webservices were expecting all of their own binaries to be nested within their sub-directory….a mess of binary files, and the website would just error that the referenced assemblies could not be found.

the solution? uncheck the web-application settings for all sub-directories and move the code binaries into the main bin directory.

i feel there’s more work to come on this solution…. 😐