Start getting ready, TFS RC is on it's way.  Thank you Jeff for the heads up!

Paulo Reichert posted a GREAT walkthrough / sample using the new Configuration Management features of .Net 2.0.

If you are using TeamBuild then this post is for you. 

In TeamExplorer when you create a new build type it will create a *.proj file.  During the creation of this build type, you will be asked which TestLists you would like executed in that build type.  Once completed if you open that proj file, you will see an item group that looks something like the following:

<ItemGroup>
  <MetaDataFile Include="$(SolutionRoot)\TestProject1\TestProject1.vsmdi">
    <TestList>TestList1;TestList2</TestList>
  </MetaDataFile>
</ItemGroup>

For this build type there are actually 2 different TestLists, TestList1 and TestList2.  These TestLists will get executed and reported on in the build.  With the out of box ItemGroup configuration both lists will actually roll up into one set of test results; but what if you wanted to to actually have multiple test runs for a given build. 

While you cannot validate you exception's message in the ExpectedException attribute all is not lost.  Lets walk through three scenarios.

In all three tests you will see an Assert.Fail in the try block.  You need this statement in case the target doesn't throw any exceptions, therefor failing the test.  The first example is a passing test, throw and exception with a message, catch it and compare the message string. 

   [TestMethod]
   public void PassingException()
   {
      const string expectedExceptionMessage = "Foobar Message";

      try
      {
         throw new ApplicationException( expectedExceptionMessage );
         Assert.Fail( "Expected an exception to get thrown by target" );
      }

      catch ( ApplicationException ex )
      {
         Assert.AreEqual<string>( expectedExceptionMessage, ex.Message );
      }
   }  

Here we see the same test failing only because the message contained in the exception is different.

   [TestMethod]
   public void FailingOnExceptionMessage()
   {
      const string expectedExceptionMessage = "Foobar Message";

      try
      {
         throw new ApplicationException( "Invalid" );
         Assert.Fail( "Expected an exception to get thrown by target" );
      }

      catch ( ApplicationException ex )
      {
         Assert.AreEqual<string>( expectedExceptionMessage, ex.Message );
      }
   }

While this last test follows the same pattern seen above the test is really only testing for the type of exception being throw.  This should be refactored to use the ExpectedException attribute.

   [TestMethod]
   public void FailingOnExceptionType()
   {
      const string expectedExceptionMessage = "Foobar Message";

      try
      {
         throw new Exception( expectedExceptionMessage );
         Assert.Fail( "Expected an exception to get thrown by target" );
      }

      catch ( ApplicationException ex )
      {     
      }

      catch
      {
         Assert.Fail( "Incorrect Exception type was thrown by target" );
      }
   }

Same test refactored, this test still fails but only to illustrate that example.

   [TestMethod, ExpectedException ( typeof ( ApplicationException) )]
   public void FailingOnExceptionType()
   {
      throw new Exception( "..." );
   }

It was finally time to join the long list of fellow Microsoft bloggers.  You will now find a subset of http://csell.net content @ http://blogs.msdn.com/csell.

I love Virtual PC, and I use if for all of my development.  I have a ton of VPC's just sucking up MAJOR disk space. I ran across and article from Andrew Connell, HOWTO: Use Virtual PC's Differencing Disks to your Advantage.  I wish I would have known about that feature a few years ago...

If you've switched from NUnit to the VSTS Unit Testing then I am pretty sure you've used the ExpectedException attribute. If you haven't it looks something like this:

[ExpectedException( typeof( ApplicationException ), "Message" )]

Using it with a test would look like the following:

I started to host my own servers about 6 years ago.  It started as a learning exercise and things have just evolved into a full time thing. 

I have both Linux and Windows running for a number of reasons.  Both are patched nightly and I do my best to run both platforms as any enterprise shop would ( with the resources I can afford ).

Having said that my Linux machine was compromised causing me a great deal of pain and frustration. Things are almost back to normal.

Just don't ever forget the Internet is the wild wild west.