> What version of rhino mocks are you using?
> You definitely should not get a slow down because of Rhino Mocks.
> How much mock setup do you have?

> On 3/15/07, John Morales <jmora...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Hi Ayende,

> > Attached is a sample project if you need to understand what i'm
> > referring to. The problem we are seeing using Rhino Mocks is that we call
> > verifyall on all our tests, what we are noticing is that if one test fails,
> > all tests that run after it fails if they use the same mock even though
> > running individually they pass. What we normally do is create all the mocks
> > in the testfixturesetup because creating the mocks adhoc in every test is
> > dramatically slower.  Is this the correct way of using RM?

> > If you look at the attached project running the testfixture entirely
> > both tests fail. If you run the second test in the class though it passes,
> > even though the test is independent of the first one. Note if we remove the
> > verifyall from the teardown it works as desired. Should we not use
> > VerifyAll? or is this fixed in 3.0?

> > Any help would be appreciated. If it is a bug and you would like me to
> > look into it I can.

> > --
> > John Morales
> > http://shortersigs.com/5008XVFPDHMK