Search Results

Search found 9492 results on 380 pages for 'logic unit'.

Page 10/380 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

  • How to deal with elimination of duplicate logic vs. cost of complexity increase?

    - by Gabriel
    I just wrote some code that is very representative of a recurring theme (in my coding world lately): repeated logic leads to an instinct to eliminate duplication which results in something that is more complex the tradeoff seems wrong to me (the examples of the negative side aren't worth posting - but this is probably the 20th console utility I've written in the past 12 months). I'm curious if I'm missing some techniques or if this is really just on of those "experience tells you when to do what" type of issues. Here's the code... I'm tempted to leave it as is, even though there will be about 20 of those if-blocks when I'm done. static void Main(string[] sargs) { try { var urls = new DirectTrackRestUrls(); var restCall = new DirectTrackRestCall(); var logger = new ConsoleLogger(); Args args = (Args)Enum.Parse(typeof(Args), string.Join(",", sargs)); if (args.HasFlag(Args.Campaigns)) { var getter = new ResourceGetter(logger, urls.ListAdvertisers, restCall); restCall.UriVariables.Add("access_id", 1); getter.GotResource += new ResourceGetter.GotResourceEventHandler(getter_GotResource); getter.GetResources(); SaveResources(); } if (args.HasFlag(Args.Advertisers)) { var getter = new ResourceGetter(logger, urls.ListAdvertisers, restCall); restCall.UriVariables.Add("access_id", 1); getter.GotResource += new ResourceGetter.GotResourceEventHandler(getter_GotResource); getter.GetResources(); SaveResources(); } if (args.HasFlag(Args.CampaignGroups)) { var getter = new ResourceGetter(logger, urls.ListCampaignGroups, restCall); getter.GotResource += new ResourceGetter.GotResourceEventHandler(getter_GotResource); getter.GetResources(); SaveResources(); } } catch (Exception e) { Console.WriteLine(e.InnerException); Console.WriteLine(e.StackTrace); }

    Read the article

  • Unit test: How best to provide an XML input?

    - by TheSilverBullet
    I need to write a unit test which validates the serialization of two attributes of an XML(size ~ 30 KB) file. What is the best way to provide an input for this test? Here are the options I have considered: Add the file to the project and use a file reader Pass the contents of the XML as a string Create the XML through a program and pass it Which is my best option and why? If there is another way which you think is better, I would love to hear it.

    Read the article

  • Are there any concerns with using a static read-only unit of work so that it behaves like a cache?

    - by Rowan Freeman
    Related question: How do I cache data that rarely changes? I'm making an ASP.NET MVC4 application. On every request the security details about the user will need to be checked with the area/controller/action that they are accessing to see if they are allowed to view it. The security information is stored in the database. For example: User Permission UserPermission Action ActionPermission A "Permission" is a token that is applied to an MVC action to indicate that the token is required in order to access the action. Once a user is given the permission (via the UserPermission table) then they have the token and can therefore access the action. I've been looking in to how to cache this data (since it rarely changes) so that I'm only querying in-memory data and not hitting a database (which is a considerable performance hit at the moment). I've tried storing things in lists, using a caching provider but I either run in to problems or performance doesn't improve. One problem that I constantly run in to is that I'm using lazy loading and dynamic proxies with EntityFramework. This means that even if I ToList() everything and store them somewhere static, the relationships are never populated. For example, User.Permissions is an ICollection but it's always null. I don't want to Include() everything because I'm trying to keep things simple and generic (and easy to modify). One thing I know is that an EntityFramework DbContext is a unit of work that acts with 1st-level caching. That is, for the duration of the unit of work, everything that is accessed is cached in memory. I want to create a read-only DbContext that will exist indefinitely and will only be used to read about permission data. Upon testing this it worked perfectly; my page load times went from 200ms+ to 20ms. I can easily force the data to refresh at certain intervals or simply leave it to refresh when the application pool is recycled. Basically it will behave like a cache. Note that the rest of the application will interact with other contexts that exist per request as normal. Is there any disadvantage to this approach? Could I be doing something different?

    Read the article

  • How do you unit test a unit test?

    - by FlySwat
    I was watching Rob Connerys webcasts on the MVCStoreFront App, and I noticed he was unit testing even the most mundane things, things like: public Decimal DiscountPrice { get { return this.Price - this.Discount; } } Would have a test like: [TestMethod] public void Test_DiscountPrice { Product p = new Product(); p.Price = 100; p.Discount = 20; Assert.IsEqual(p.DiscountPrice,80); } While, I am all for unit testing, I sometimes wonder if this form of test first development is really beneficial, for example, in a real process, you have 3-4 layers above your code (Business Request, Requirements Document, Architecture Document), where the actual defined business rule (Discount Price is Price - Discount) could be misdefined. If that's the situation, your unit test means nothing to you. Additionally, your unit test is another point of failure: [TestMethod] public void Test_DiscountPrice { Product p = new Product(); p.Price = 100; p.Discount = 20; Assert.IsEqual(p.DiscountPrice,90); } Now the test is flawed. Obviously in a simple test, it's no big deal, but say we were testing a complicated business rule. What do we gain here? Fast forward two years into the application's life, when maintenance developers are maintaining it. Now the business changes its rule, and the test breaks again, some rookie developer then fixes the test incorrectly...we now have another point of failure. All I see is more possible points of failure, with no real beneficial return, if the discount price is wrong, the test team will still find the issue, how did unit testing save any work? What am I missing here? Please teach me to love TDD, as I'm having a hard time accepting it as useful so far. I want too, because I want to stay progressive, but it just doesn't make sense to me. EDIT: A couple people keep mentioned that testing helps enforce the spec. It has been my experience that the spec has been wrong as well, more often than not, but maybe I'm doomed to work in an organization where the specs are written by people who shouldn't be writing specs.

    Read the article

  • How do you unit test the real world?

    - by Kim Sun-wu
    I'm primarily a C++ coder, and thus far, have managed without really writing tests for all of my code. I've decided this is a Bad Idea(tm), after adding new features that subtly broke old features, or, depending on how you wish to look at it, introduced some new "features" of their own. But, unit testing seems to be an extremely brittle mechanism. You can test for something in "perfect" conditions, but you don't get to see how your code performs when stuff breaks. A for instance is a crawler, let's say it crawls a few specific sites, for data X. Do you simply save sample pages, test against those, and hope that the sites never change? This would work fine as regression tests, but, what sort of tests would you write to constantly check those sites live and let you know when the application isn't doing it's job because the site changed something, that now causes your application to crash? Wouldn't you want your test suite to monitor the intent of the code? The above example is a bit contrived, and something I haven't run into (in case you haven't guessed). Let me pick something I have, though. How do you test an application will do its job in the face of a degraded network stack? That is, say you have a moderate amount of packet loss, for one reason or the other, and you have a function DoSomethingOverTheNetwork() which is supposed to degrade gracefully when the stack isn't performing as it's supposed to; but does it? The developer tests it personally by purposely setting up a gateway that drops packets to simulate a bad network when he first writes it. A few months later, someone checks in some code that modifies something subtly, so the degradation isn't detected in time, or, the application doesn't even recognize the degradation, this is never caught, because you can't run real world tests like this using unit tests, can you? Further, how about file corruption? Let's say you're storing a list of servers in a file, and the checksum looks okay, but the data isn't really. You want the code to handle that, you write some code that you think does that. How do you test that it does exactly that for the life of the application? Can you? Hence, brittleness. Unit tests seem to test the code only in perfect conditions(and this is promoted, with mock objects and such), not what they'll face in the wild. Don't get me wrong, I think unit tests are great, but a test suite composed only of them seems to be a smart way to introduce subtle bugs in your code while feeling overconfident about it's reliability. How do I address the above situations? If unit tests aren't the answer, what is? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Using Unit of Work design pattern / NHibernate Sessions in an MVVM WPF

    - by Echiban
    I think I am stuck in the paralysis of analysis. Please help! I currently have a project that Uses NHibernate on SQLite Implements Repository and Unit of Work pattern: http://blogs.hibernatingrhinos.com/nhibernate/archive/2008/04/10/nhibernate-and-the-unit-of-work-pattern.aspx MVVM strategy in a WPF app Unit of Work implementation in my case supports one NHibernate session at a time. I thought at the time that this makes sense; it hides inner workings of NHibernate session from ViewModel. Now, according to Oren Eini (Ayende): http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/ee819139.aspx He convinces the audience that NHibernate sessions should be created / disposed when the view associated with the presenter / viewmodel is disposed. He presents issues why you don't want one session per windows app, nor do you want a session to be created / disposed per transaction. This unfortunately poses a problem because my UI can easily have 10+ view/viewmodels present in an app. He is presenting using a MVP strategy, but does his advice translate to MVVM? Does this mean that I should scrap the unit of work and have viewmodel create NHibernate sessions directly? Should a WPF app only have one working session at a time? If that is true, when should I create / dispose a NHibernate session? And I still haven't considered how NHibernate Stateless sessions fit into all this! My brain is going to explode. Please help!

    Read the article

  • Junit: splitting integration test and Unit tests.

    - by jeff porter
    Hello all, I've inherited a load of Junit test, but these tests (apart from most not working) are a mixture of actual unit test and integration tests (requiring external systems, db etc). So I'm trying to think of a way to actually separate them out, so that I can run the unit test nice and quickly and the integration tests after that. The options are.. 1: Split them into separate directories. 2: Move to Junit4 and annotate the classes to separate them. 3: Use a file naming convention to tell what a class is , i.e. AdapterATest and AdapterAIntergrationTest. 3 has the issue that Eclipse has the option to "Run all tests in the selected project/package or folder". So it would make it very hard to just run the integration tests. 2: runs the risk that developers might start writing integration tests in unit test classes and it just gets messy. 1: Seems like the neatest solution, but my gut says there must be a better solution out there. So that is my question, how do you lot break apart integration tests and proper unit tests?

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing in the real world

    - by Malfist
    I manage a rather large application (50k+ lines of code) by myself, and it manages some rather critical business actions. To describe the program simple, I would say it's a fancy UI with the ability to display and change data from the database, and it's managing around 1,000 rental units, and about 3k tenants and all the finances. When I make changes, because it's so large of a code base, I sometimes break something somewhere else. I typically test it by going though the stuff I changed at the functional level (i.e. I run the program and work through the UI), but I can't test for every situation. That is why I want to get started with unit testing. However, this isn't a true, three tier program with a database tier, a business tier, and a UI tier. A lot of the business logic is performed in the UI classes, and many things are done on events. To complicate things, everything is database driven, and I've not seen (so far) good suggestions on how to unit test database interactions. How would be a good way to get started with unit testing for this application. Keep in mind. I've never done unit testing or TDD before. Should I rewrite it to remove the business logic from the UI classes (a lot of work)? Or is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • uninitialized constant Test::Unit::TestResult::TestResultFailureSupport

    - by Vitaly Kushner
    I get the error in subj when I'm trying to run specs or generators in a fresh rails project. This happens when I add shoulda to the mix. I added the following in the config/environment.rb: config.gem 'rspec', :version => '1.2.6', :lib => false config.gem 'rspec-rails', :version => '1.2.6', :lib => false config.gem "thoughtbot-shoulda", :version => "2.10.2", :lib => 'shoulda', :source => "http://gems.github.com" I'm on OSX. ruby 1.8.6 (2008-08-11 patchlevel 287) gems 1.3.5 rails 2.3.4 rspec - 1.2.6 shoulda - 2.10.2 test-unit - 2.0.3 I'm aware of this and adding config.gem 'test-unit', :lib => 'test/unit' indeed solves the genrator problem as it doesn't throw an exception, but it prints 0 tests, 0 assertions, 0 failures, 0 errors, 0 pendings, 0 omissions, 0 notifications at the end of the run so I suppose it tries to run tests which is unexpected and undesired, also the specs stop to run at all, seems like rspec is not running at all, when running rake spec I get the test-unit output again (with 0 tests as there are only specs, no tests defined)

    Read the article

  • How to (unit-)test data intensive PL/SQL application

    - by doom2.wad
    Our team is willing to unit-test a new code written under a running project extending an existing huge Oracle system. The system is written solely in PL/SQL, consists of thousands of tables, hundreds of stored procedures packages, mostly getting data from tables and/or inserting/updating other data. Our extension is not an exception. Most functions return data from a quite complex SELECT statementa over many mutually bound tables (with a little added logic before returning them) or make transformation from one complicated data structure to another (complicated in another way). What is the best approach to unit-test such code? There are no unit tests for existing code base. To make things worse, only packages, triggers and views are source-controlled, table structures (including "alter table" stuff and necessary data transformations are deployed via channel other than version control). There is no way to change this within our project's scope. Maintaining testing data set seems to be impossible since there is new code deployed to the production environment on weekly basis, usually without prior notice, often changing data structure (add a column here, remove one there). I'd be glad for any suggestion or reference to help us. Some team members tend to be tired by figuring out how to even start for our experience with unit-testing does not cover PL/SQL data intensive legacy systems (only those "from-the-book" greenfield Java projects).

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing Private Method in Resource Managing Class (C++)

    - by BillyONeal
    I previously asked this question under another name but deleted it because I didn't explain it very well. Let's say I have a class which manages a file. Let's say that this class treats the file as having a specific file format, and contains methods to perform operations on this file: class Foo { std::wstring fileName_; public: Foo(const std::wstring& fileName) : fileName_(fileName) { //Construct a Foo here. }; int getChecksum() { //Open the file and read some part of it //Long method to figure out what checksum it is. //Return the checksum. } }; Let's say I'd like to be able to unit test the part of this class that calculates the checksum. Unit testing the parts of the class that load in the file and such is impractical, because to test every part of the getChecksum() method I might need to construct 40 or 50 files! Now lets say I'd like to reuse the checksum method elsewhere in the class. I extract the method so that it now looks like this: class Foo { std::wstring fileName_; static int calculateChecksum(const std::vector<unsigned char> &fileBytes) { //Long method to figure out what checksum it is. } public: Foo(const std::wstring& fileName) : fileName_(fileName) { //Construct a Foo here. }; int getChecksum() { //Open the file and read some part of it return calculateChecksum( something ); } void modifyThisFileSomehow() { //Perform modification int newChecksum = calculateChecksum( something ); //Apply the newChecksum to the file } }; Now I'd like to unit test the calculateChecksum() method because it's easy to test and complicated, and I don't care about unit testing getChecksum() because it's simple and very difficult to test. But I can't test calculateChecksum() directly because it is private. Does anyone know of a solution to this problem?

    Read the article

  • Need an advice for unit testing using mock object

    - by Andree
    Hi there, I just recently read about "Mocking objects" for unit testing and currently I'm having a difficulties implementing this approach in my application. Please let me explain my problem. I have a User model class, which is dependent on 2 data sources (database and facebook web service). The controller class simply use this User model as an interface to access data and it doesn't care about where the data came from. Currently I never done any unit test to this User model because it is dependent on an external web service. But just a while ago, I read about object mocking and now I know that it is a common approach to unit test a class that depends on external resources (like in my case). Now I want to create a unit test for the User model, but then I encountered a design issue: In order for the User model to use a mocked Facebook SDK, I have to inject this mocked Facebook SDK to the User object (probably using a setter). Therefore I can't construct the Facebook SDK inside the User object. I have to construct it outside the User object, and inject the SDK into the User object. The real client of my User model is the application's controller. Therefore I have to construct the Facebook SDK inside the controller and inject it to the user object. Well, this is a problem because I want my controller to be as clean as possible. I want my controller to be ignorant about the application's data source. I'm not good at explaining something systematically, so you'll probably sleeping before reading this last paragraph. But anyway, I want to ask if anyone here ever encountered the same problem as mine? How do you solve this problem? Regards, Andree

    Read the article

  • How do you unit-test a method with complex input-output

    - by Dan
    When you have a simple method, like for example sum(int x, int y), it is easy to write unit tests. You can check that method will sum correctly two sample integers, for example 2 + 3 should return 5, then you will check the same for some "extraordinary" numbers, for example negative values and zero. Each of these should be separate unit test, as a single unit test should contain single assert. What do you do when you have a complex input-output? Take a Xml parser for example. You can have a single method parse(String xml) that receives the String and returns a Dom object. You can write separate tests that will check that certain text node is parsed correctly, that attributes are parsed OK, that child node belongs to parent etc. For all these I can write a simple input, for example <root><child/></root> that will be used to check parent-child relationships between nodes and so on for the rest of expectations. Now, take a look at follwing Xml: <root> <child1 attribute11="attribute 11 value" attribute12="attribute 12 value">Text 1</child1> <child2 attribute21="attribute 21 value" attribute22="attribute 22 value">Text 2</child2> </root> In order to check that method worked correctly, I need to check many complex conditions, like that attribute11 and attribute12 belong to element1, that Text 1 belongs to child1 etc. I do not want to put more than one assert in my unit-test. How can I accomplish that?

    Read the article

  • In separate data access & business logic layer, can I use Entity framework classes in business layer

    - by Greg
    In separate data access & business logic layer, can I use Entity framework classes in business layer? EDIT: I don't think I will need to swap out the data access layer from my business logic in the future (i.e. will be SQL Server), however I will for the UI layer. Therefore the question is more meant to be are there any major issues with using EF classes for me in the business layer? Seems like there would be less plumbing code.

    Read the article

  • How to parse a string of boolean logic in PHP

    - by TheOddLinguist
    I'm building a PHP class with a private member function that returns a string value such as: 'true && true || false' to a public member function. (This string is the result of some regex matching and property lookups.) What I'd like to do is have PHP parse the returned logic and have the aforementioned public function return whether the boolean result of the parsed logic is true or false. I tried eval(), but I get no output at all. I tried typecasting the boolean returns...but there's no way to typecast operators...hehe Any ideas? (Let me know if you need more information.)

    Read the article

  • How do I parse boolean logic?

    - by d03boy
    I need to write a boolean logic parser which will translate the boolean logic language to a SQL WHERE clause. The order of the operands will always be in the correct order (with value on the right). Here is a relatively simple example. There could be nested parentheses and the use of NOT operators, etc. (CACOUNT=01 OR CACOUNT=02 OR CACOUNT=03 OR CACOUNT=05 OR CACOUNT=07 OR CACOUNT=09 OR CACOUNT=12 OR CACOUNT=13 OR CACOUNT=18) AND Q4=1 AND NAME=TIMOTHY Here is what the WHERE clause would resemble. WHERE ( EXISTS ( SELECT 1 FROM MyVerticalTable b WHERE b.Key=a.Key AND b.Key='CACOUNT' AND b.Value='01' ) )

    Read the article

  • iPHone: Unit/Logic Tests initWithNibName

    - by pion
    I have setup my Logic Tests following the instructions on http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/Xcode/Conceptual/iphone_development/135-Unit_Testing_Applications/unit_testing_applications.html. I could test a couple classes successfully. But I got error when testing the following: - (id)init { if (self = [super initWithNibName:@"Foo" bundle:nil]) { ... } return self; } The error message is -[UIViewController _loadViewFromNibNamed:bundle:] was unable to load a nib named "Foo" My question: Did I do something wrong? Missed something? or I cannot test -initWithNibName using Logic Tests technique. Thanks in advance for your help.

    Read the article

  • What logic operator to use, as3?

    - by VideoDnd
    What operator or expression can I use that will fire on every number, including zero? I want a logic operator that will fire with ever number it receives. My animations pause at zero. This skips on zero if (numberThing> 0); This skips on 9 if (numberThing>> 0); This jitters 'fires quickly and goes back on count' if (numberThing== 0); EXPLANATION I'm catching split string values in a logic function, and feeding them to a series of IF, ELSE IF statements. I'm using this with a timer, so I can measure the discrepency. CODE • I GET VALUES FROM TIMER • STRING GOES TO TEXTFIELD 'substr' • NUMBER TRIGGERS TWEENS 'parseInt' • Goes to series of IF and ELSE IF statements

    Read the article

  • Multiple Silverlight Unit Test Projects in Solution

    - by IUnknown
    I am building out a number of Silverlight 4.0 libraries that are part of the same solution. I like to break them into separate projects and have a Unit Test project for each: SolutionX -LibraryProject1 ---Class1.cs ---Class2.cs -LibraryProject1.Test ---Tests1.cs ---Tests2.cs -LibraryProject2 ---Class1.cs ---Class2.cs ---CLass3.cs -LibraryProject2.Test ---Tests1.cs ---Tests2.cs ---Tests3.cs -LibraryProject3 ---Class1.cs -LibraryProject3.Test ---Tests1.cs This works great when using VS regular test projects and infrastructure because I can create and execute list of test that are aggregated from each Test project. But with the Silverlight Unit Test Framework since the Silverlight Unit Test Project must be the "start up project" I cannot figure how to run a collection of tests from each test project in one go. I have to run each separately then switch the starting project each time. I would prefer to avoid create complex build scripts or build definitions - is there a way to run all the tests at once? -Thanks

    Read the article

  • Tibco Unit Testing tools

    - by mezoid
    Does anyone know what unit testing tools are available when developing Tibco processes? In the next few months I'll be working on a Tibco project and I'm trying to find any existing unit testing frameworks that might make the job easier to build with a TDD approach. Thus far, the only one I've been able to locate is called BWUnit. It seems ok but its currently in beta and its commercial software. If possible I'd like to use an open source tool but as long as it is able to do a good job I'd be happy. So does anyone know of any other unit testing tools for Tibco development?

    Read the article

  • Where to ask practical unit-testing questions?

    - by Ian Boyd
    Before i can understand unit testing, i have to see real world examples. Every book, blog, article, or answer i've seen gives hypothetical examples that don't apply to the/my real world. i really don't want to flood StackOverflow with hundreds of questions all titled "How do i unit-test this?" There must be another place i can go to ask for real solutions. Where can i go to get practical answers to unit-testing questions? Note: i would give an example question, but then people would get grumpy when i asked the 200 follow-up questions.

    Read the article

  • Good tools which generate NUnit unit tests for .NET assemblies in Visual Studio 2008

    - by andy
    Hey guys, I'm pretty new to Unit Testing so bare with me. I realize that best best practice is not to auto generate unit tests, however I'd like to use Code Generation to set-up the basic skeleton of the tests. Now, I know Visual Studio 2008 already has the built in "create tests", however, it just creates a flat list of all the classes it's going to test... and it's not for NUnit right? Ideally, I'd like the code generation to follow the folder AND namespace structure of the assembly its generating tests for. Can you guys recommend any good tools which generate NUnit unit tests for .NET assemblies in Visual Studio 2008? cheers!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >