Search Results

Search found 694 results on 28 pages for 'mock'.

Page 10/28 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

• Need help understanding Mocks and Stubs

  - by Theomax

  I'm new to use mocking frameworks and I have a few questions on the things that I am not clear on. I'm using Rhinomocks to generate mock objects in my unit tests. I understand that mocks can be created to verify interactions between methods and they record the interactions etc and stubs allow you to setup data and entities required by the test but you do not verify expectations on stubs. Looking at the recent unit tests I have created, I appear to be creating mocks literally for the purpose of stubbing and allowing for data to be setup. Is this a correct usage of mocks or is it incorrect if you're not actually calling verify on them? For example: user = MockRepository.GenerateMock<User>(); user.Stub(x => x.Id = Guid.NewGuid()); user.Stub(x => x.Name = "User1"); In the above code I generate a new user mock object, but I use a mock so I can stub the properties of the user because in some cases if the properties do not have a setter and I need to set them it seems the only way is to stub the property values. Is this a correct usage of stubbing and mocking? Also, I am not completely clear on what the difference between the following lines is: user.Stub(x => x.Id).Return(new Guid()); user.Stub(x => x.Id = Guid.NewGuid());

  Read the article

• Windows 7: How to enable firewall disabled by global policy on a computer joined to a domain?

  - by kzen

  On a Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit laptop joined to a corporate domain, the Windows Firewall is disabled by a global policy. Is there any way to enable the Windows Firewall in this scenario? The gpedit.msc setting Windows Firewall: Protect all network connections is inaccessible. EDIT: It appears that changing HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\services\gpsvc\Start value to 4 will disable the GPO and allow you to start the firewall and stop the bots from pushing cr*p to your computer... will check on Monday and if it works I'll confirm here in case someone else in my situation wonders upon this question... EDIT: It's probably better if I write a mock windows service not doing anything and name it according to what is expected to be on my box and than crete mock McCrappy executable and mock McCrappy folder structure and remove all the actual stuff... That would take a little time but would most certainly make my box completely stealthy...

  Read the article

• Why doesn't every class in the .Net framework have a corresponding interface?

  - by Thorsten Lorenz

  Since I started to develop in a test/behavior driven style, I appreciated the ability to mock out every dependency. Since mocking frameworks like Moq work best when told to mock an interface, I now implement an interface for almost every class I create b/c most likely I will have to mock it out in a test eventually. Well, and programming to an interface is good practice, anyways. At times, my classes take dependencies on .Net classes (e.g. FileSystemWatcher, DispatcherTimer). It would be great in that case to have an interface, so I could depend on an IDispatcherTimer instead, to be able to pass it a mock and simulate its behavior to see if my system under test reacts correctly. Unfortunately both of above mentioned classes do not implement such interfaces, so I have to resort to creating adapters, that do nothing else but inherit from the original class and conform to an interface, that I then can use. Here is such an adapter for the DispatcherTimer and the corresponding interface: using System; using System.Windows.Threading; public interface IDispatcherTimer { #region Events event EventHandler Tick; #endregion #region Properties Dispatcher Dispatcher { get; } TimeSpan Interval { get; set; } bool IsEnabled { get; set; } object Tag { get; set; } #endregion #region Public Methods void Start(); void Stop(); #endregion } /// <summary> /// Adapts the DispatcherTimer class to implement the <see cref="IDispatcherTimer"/> interface. /// </summary> public class DispatcherTimerAdapter : DispatcherTimer, IDispatcherTimer { } Although this is not the end of the world, I wonder, why the .Net developers didn't take the minute to make their classes implement these interfaces from the get go. It puzzles me especially since now there is a big push for good practices from inside Microsoft. Does anyone have any (maybe inside) information why this contradiction exists?

  Read the article

• Moq, a translator and an expression

  - by jeriley

  I'm working with an expression within a moq-ed "Get Service" and ran into a rather annoying issue. In order to get this test to run correctly and the get service to return what it should, there's a translator in between that takes what you've asked for, sends it off and gets what you -really- want. So, thinking this was easy I attempt this ... the fakelist is the TEntity objects (translated, used by the UI) and TEnterpriseObject is the actual persistance. mockGet.Setup(mock => mock.Get(It.IsAny<Expression<Func<TEnterpriseObject, bool>>>())).Returns( (Expression<Func<TEnterpriseObject, bool>> expression) => { var items = new List<TEnterpriseObject>(); var translator = (IEntityTranslator<TEntity, TEnterpriseObject>) ObjectFactory.GetInstance(typeof (IEntityTranslator<TEntity, TEnterpriseObject>)); fakeList.ForEach(fake => items.Add(translator.ToEnterpriseObject(fake))); items = items.Where(expression); var result = new List<TEnterpriseObject>(items); fakeList.Clear(); result.ForEach(item => translator.ToEntity(item)); return items; }); I'm getting the red squigglie under there items.where(expression) -- says it can't be infered from usage (confused between <Func<TEnterpriseObject,bool>> and <Func<TEnterpriseObject,int,bool>>) A far simpler version works great ... mockGet.Setup(mock => mock.Get(It.IsAny<Expression<Func<TEntity, bool>>>())).Returns( (Expression<Func<TEntity, bool>> expression) => fakeList.AsQueryable().Where(expression)); so I'm not sure what I'm missing... ideas?

  Read the article

• 3 matchers expected, 4 recorded.

  - by user564159

  I get this exception during the mock recording time. Searched for a solution in this forum. Made sure that i did not mess up any another parameter. The below mock expection is giving the error. EasyMock.expect(slotManager.addSlotPageletBinding(EasyMock.isA(String.class), EasyMock.isA(String.class), EasyMock.isA(helloWorld.class))).andReturn(true); before this statement i have another mock expection on the same method with TWO parameter(overloaded method).Below is that mock. EasyMock.expect(slotManager.addSlotPageletBinding(EasyMock.isA(String.class),EasyMock.isA(String.class))).andReturn(true).anyTimes(); Could any one guide me on this. Thanks. java.lang.IllegalStateException: 3 matchers expected, 4 recorded. at org.easymock.internal.ExpectedInvocation.createMissingMatchers(ExpectedInvocation.java:56) at org.easymock.internal.ExpectedInvocation.(ExpectedInvocation.java:48) at org.easymock.internal.ExpectedInvocation.(ExpectedInvocation.java:40) at org.easymock.internal.RecordState.invoke(RecordState.java:76) at org.easymock.internal.MockInvocationHandler.invoke(MockInvocationHandler.java:38) at org.easymock.internal.ObjectMethodsFilter.invoke(ObjectMethodsFilter.java:72) at org.easymock.classextension.internal.ClassProxyFactory$1.intercept(ClassProxyFactory.java:79) at com.amazon.inca.application.SlotManager$$EnhancerByCGLIB$$3bf5ac02.addSlotPageletBinding() at com.amazon.iris3.apps.Iris3YourAccountApplicationTest.testBuildIncaViewConfiguration(Iris3YourAccountApplicationTest.java:107) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597) at junit.framework.TestCase.runTest(TestCase.java:168) at junit.framework.TestCase.runBare(TestCase.java:134) at junit.framework.TestResult$1.protect(TestResult.java:110) at junit.framework.TestResult.runProtected(TestResult.java:128) at junit.framework.TestResult.run(TestResult.java:113) at junit.framework.TestCase.run(TestCase.java:124) at junit.framework.TestSuite.runTest(TestSuite.java:232) at junit.framework.TestSuite.run(TestSuite.java:227) at org.junit.internal.runners.JUnit38ClassRunner.run(JUnit38ClassRunner.java:83) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit4.runner.JUnit4TestReference.run(JUnit4TestReference.java:46) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.TestExecution.run(TestExecution.java:38) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:467) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:683) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.run(RemoteTestRunner.java:390) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.main(RemoteTestRunner.java:197)

  Read the article

• Unit testing with Mocks. Test behaviour not implementation

  - by Kenny Eliasson

  Hi.. I always had a problem when unit testing classes that calls other classes, for example I have a class that creates a new user from a phone-number then saves it to the database and sends a SMS to the number provided. Like the code provided below. public class UserRegistrationProcess : IUserRegistration { private readonly IRepository _repository; private readonly ISmsService _smsService; public UserRegistrationProcess(IRepository repository, ISmsService smsService) { _repository = repository; _smsService = smsService; } public void Register(string phone) { var user = new User(phone); _repository.Save(user); _smsService.Send(phone, "Welcome", "Message!"); } } It is a really simple class but how would you go about and test it? At the moment im using Mocks but I dont really like it [Test] public void WhenRegistreringANewUser_TheNewUserIsSavedToTheDatabase() { var repository = new Mock<IRepository>(); var smsService = new Mock<ISmsService>(); var userRegistration = new UserRegistrationProcess(repository.Object, smsService.Object); var phone = "0768524440"; userRegistration.Register(phone); repository.Verify(x => x.Save(It.Is<User>(user => user.Phone == phone)), Times.Once()); } [Test] public void WhenRegistreringANewUser_ItWillSendANewSms() { var repository = new Mock<IRepository>(); var smsService = new Mock<ISmsService>(); var userRegistration = new UserRegistrationProcess(repository.Object, smsService.Object); var phone = "0768524440"; userRegistration.Register(phone); smsService.Verify(x => x.Send(phone, It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>()), Times.Once()); } It feels like I am testing the wrong thing here? Any thoughts on how to make this better?

  Read the article

• Mocking non-virtual methods in C++ without editing production code?

  - by wk1989

  Hello, I am a fairly new software developer currently working adding unit tests to an existing C++ project that started years ago. Due to a non-technical reason, I'm not allowed to modify any existing code. The base class of all my modules has a bunch of methods for Setting/Getting data and communicating with other modules. Since I just want to unit testing each individual module, I want to be able to use canned values for all my inter-module communication methods. I.e. for a method Ping() which checks if another module is active, I want to have it return true or false based on what kind of test I'm doing. I've been looking into Google Test and Google Mock, and it does support mocking non-virtual methods. However the approach described (http://code.google.com/p/googlemock/wiki/CookBook#Mocking_Nonvirtual_Methods) requires me to "templatize" the original methods to take in either real or mock objects. I can't go and templatize my methods in the base class due to the requirement mentioned earlier, so I need some other way of mocking these virtual methods Basically, the methods I want to mock are in some base class, the modules I want to unit test and create mocks of are derived classes of that base class. There are intermediate modules in between my base Module class and the modules that I want to test. I would appreciate any advise! Thanks, JW EDIT: A more concrete examples My base class is lets say rootModule, the module I want to test is leafModule. There is an intermediate module which inherits from rootModule, leafModule inherits from this intermediate module. In my leafModule, I want to test the doStuff() method, which calls the non virtual GetStatus(moduleName) defined in the rootModule class. I need to somehow make GetStatus() to return a chosen canned value. Mocking is new to me, so is using mock objects even the right approach?

  Read the article

• How to properly match varargs in Mockito

  - by qualidafial

  I've been trying to get to mock a method with vararg parameters using Mockito: interface A { B b(int x, int y, C... c); } A a = mock(A.class); B b = mock(B.class); when(a.b(anyInt(), anyInt(), any(C[].class))).thenReturn(b); assertEquals(b, a.b(1, 2)); This doesn't work, however if I do this instead: when(a.b(anyInt(), anyInt())).thenReturn(b); assertEquals(b, a.b(1, 2)); This works, despite that I have completely omitted the varargs argument when stubbing the method. Any clues?

  Read the article

• Combining SpecFlow table and Moq mocked object

  - by Confused

  I have a situation where I want to use a mocked object (using Moq) so I can create setup and expectations, but also want to supply some of the property values using the SpecFlow Table. Is there a convenient way to create a mock and supply the table for the seed values? // Specflow feature Scenario Outline: MyOutline Given I have a MyObject object as | Field | Value | | Title | The Title | | Id | The Id | // Specflow step code Mock<MyObject> _myMock; [Given(@"I have a MyObject object as")] public void GivenIHaveAMyObjectObjectAs(Table table) { var obj = table.CreateInstance<MyObject>(); _myMock = new Mock<MyObject>(); // How do I easily combine the two? }

  Read the article

• Need help mocking a ASP.NET Controller in Rhino Mocks

  - by Pure.Krome

  Hi folks, I'm trying to mock up a fake ASP.NET Controller. I don't have any concrete controllers, so I was hoping to just mock a Controller and it will work. This is what I currently have: _fakeRequestBase = MockRepository.GenerateMock<HttpRequestBase>(); _fakeRequestBase.Stub(x => x.HttpMethod).Return("GET"); _fakeContextBase = MockRepository.GenerateMock<HttpContextBase>(); _fakeContextBase.Stub(x => x.Request).Return(_fakeRequestBase); var controllerContext = new ControllerContext(_fakeContextBase, new RouteData(), MockRepository.GenerateMock<ControllerBase>()); _fakeController = MockRepository.GenerateMock<Controller>(); _fakeController.Stub(x => x.ControllerContext).Return(controllerContext); Everything works except the last line, which throws a runtime error and is asking me for some Rhino.Mocks source code or something (which I don't have). See how I'm trying to mock up an abstract Controller - is that allowed? Can someone help me?

  Read the article

• Creating TCP network errors for unit testing

  - by Robert S. Barnes

  I'd like to create various network errors during testing. I'm using the Berkely sockets API directly in C++ on Linux. I'm running a mock server in another thread from within Boost.Test which listens on localhost. For instance, I'd like to create a timeout during connect. So far I've tried not calling accept in my mock server and setting the backlog to 1, then making multiple connections, but all seem to successfully connect. I would think that if there wasn't room in the backlog queue I would at least get a connection refused error if not a timeout. I'd like to do this all programatically if possible, but I'd consider using something external like IPchains to intentionally drop certain packets to certain ports during testing, but I'd need to automate creating and removing rules so I could do it from within my Boost.Test unit tests. I suppose I could mock the various system calls involved, but I'd rather go through a real TCP stack if possible. Ideas?

  Read the article

• Tests that are 2-3 times bigger than the testable code

  - by HeavyWave

  Is it normal to have tests that are way bigger than the actual code being tested? For every line of code I am testing I usually have 2-3 lines in the unit test. Which ultimately leads to tons of time being spent just typing the tests in (mock, mock and mock more). Where are the time savings? Do you ever avoid tests for code that is along the lines of being trivial? Most of my methods are less than 10 lines long and testing each one of them takes a lot of time, to the point where, as you see, I start questioning writing most of the tests in the first place. I am not advocating not unit testing, I like it. Just want to see what factors people consider before writing tests. They come at a cost (in terms of time, hence money), so this cost must be evaluated somehow. How do you estimate the savings created by your unit tests, if ever?

  Read the article

• CodePlex Daily Summary for Tuesday, March 30, 2010

  CodePlex Daily Summary for Tuesday, March 30, 2010New ProjectsCloudMail: Want to send email from Azure? Cloud Mail is designed to provide a small, effective and reliable solution for sending email from the Azure platfor...CommunityServer Extensions: Here you can find some CommunityServer extensions and bug fixes. The main goal is to provide you with the ability to correct some common problems...ContactSync: ContactSync is a set of .NET libraries, UI controls and applications for managing and synchronizing contact information. It includes managed wrapp...Dng portal: DNG Portal base on asp.net MVCDotNetNuke Referral Tracker: The Referral Tracker module allows you to save URL variables, the referring page, and the previous page into a session variable or cookie. Then, th...Foursquare for Windows Phone 7: Foursquare for Windows Phone 7.GEGetDocConfig: SharePoint utility to list information concerning document libraries in one or more sites. Displays Size, Validity, Folder, Parent, Author, Minor a...Google Maps API for .NET: Fast and lightweight client libraries for Google Maps API.kbcchina: kbc chinaLoad Test User Mock Toolkits: 用途 This project is a framework mocking the user actvities with VSTS Load Test tool to faster the test script development. 此项目包括一套模拟用户行为的通用框架，可以简化...Resonance: Resonance is a system to train neural networks, it allows to automate the train of a neural network, distributing the calculation on multiple machi...SharePoint Company Directory / Active Directory Self Service System: This is a very simple system which was designed for a Bank to allow users to update their contact information within SharePoint . Then this info ca...SmartShelf: Manage files and folders on Windows and Windows Live.sysFix: sysFix is a tool for system administrators to easily manage and fix common system errors.xnaWebcam: Webcam usage in XNA GameStudio 3.1New ReleasesAll-In-One Code Framework: All-In-One Code Framework 2010-03-29: Improved and Newly Added Examples:For an up-to-date list, please refer to All-In-One Code Framework Sample Catalog. Samples for Azure Name Des...ARSoft.Tools.Net - C# DNS and SPF Library: 1.3.0: Added support for creating own dns server implementations. Added full IPv6 support to dns client Some performance optimizations to dns clientArtefact Animator: Artefact Animator - Silverlight 3 and WPF .Net 3.5: Artefact Animator Version 2.0.4.1 Silverlight 3 ArtefactSL.dll for both Debug and Release. WPF 3.5 Artefact.dll for both Debug and Release.BatterySaver: Version 0.4: Added support for a system tray icon for controlling the application and switching profiles (Issue)BizTalk Server 2006 Orchestration Profiler: Profiler v1.2: This is a point release of the profiler and has been updatd to work on 64 bit systems. No other new functionality is available. To use this ensure...CloudMail: CloudMail_0.5_beta: Initial public release. For documentation see http://cloudmail.codeplex.com/documentation.CycleMania Starter Kit EAP - ASP.NET 4 Problem - Design - Solution: Cyclemania 0.08.44: See Source Code tab for recent change history.Dawf: Dual Audio Workflow: Beta 2: Fix little bugs and improve usablity by changing the way it finds the good audio.DotNetNuke Referral Tracker: 2.0.1: First releaseFoursquare for Windows Phone 7: Foursquare 2010.03.29.02: Foursquare 2010.03.29.02GEGetDocConfig: GEGETDOCCONFIG.ZIP: Installation: Simply download the zip file and extract the executable into its own directory on the SharePoint front end server Note: There will b...GKO Libraries: GKO Libraries 0.2 Beta: Added: Binary search Unmanaged wrappers, interop and pinvoke functions and structures Windows service wrapper Video mode helpers and more.....Google Maps API for .NET: GoogleMapsForNET v0.9 alpha release: First version, contains Core library featuring: Geocoding API Elevation API Static Maps APIGoogle Maps API for .NET: GoogleMapsForNET v0.9.1 alpha release: Fixed dependencies issues; added NUnit binaries and updated Newtonsoft Json library.Google Maps API for .NET: GoogleMapsForNET v0.9.2a alpha release: Recommended update.Code clean-up; did refactoring and major interface changes in Static Maps because it wasn't aligned to the 'simplest and least r...Home Access Plus+: v3.2.0.0: v3.2.0.0 Release Change Log: More AJAX to reduce page refreshes (Deleting, New Folder, Rename moved from browser popups) Only 3 Browser Popups (1...Html to OpenXml: HtmlToOpenXml 1.1: The dll library to include in your project. The dll is signed for GAC support. Compiled with .Net 3.5, Dependencies on System.Drawing.dll and Docu...Latent Semantic Analysis: Latest sources: Just the latest sources. Just click the changeset. Please note that in order to compile this code you need to download some additional code. You ...Load Test User Mock Toolkits: Load Test User Mock Toolkits Help Doc: Samples and The framework introduction. 包括框架介绍和典型示例Load Test User Mock Toolkits: Open.LoadTest.User.Mock.Toolkits 1.0 alpha: 此版本为非正式版本，未对性能方面进行优化。而且框架正在重构调整中。Mobile Broadband Logging Monitor: Mobile Broadband Logging Monitor 1.2.4: This edition supports: Newer and older editions of Birdstep Technology's EasyConnect HUAWEI Mobile Partner MWConn User defined location for s...Nito.KitchenSink: Version 3: Added Encoding.GetString(Stream, bool) for converting an entire stream into a string. Changed Stream.CopyTo to allow the stream to be closed/abor...Numina Application Framework: Numina.Framework Core 49088: Fixed Bug with Headers introduced in rev. 48249 with change to HttpUtil class. admin/User_Pending.aspx page users weren't able to be deleted Do...OAuthLib: OAuthLib (1.6.4.0): Fix for 6390 Make it possible to configure time out value.Quack Quack Says the Duck: Quack Quack Says The Duck 1.1.0.0: This new release pushes some work onto a background thread clearing issues with multiple screen clicks while the UI was blocking.Rapidshare Episode Downloader: RED v0.8.4: - Added Edit feature - Moved season & episode int to string into a separate function - Fixed some more minor issues - Added 'Previous' feature - F...RoTwee: RoTwee (8.1.3.0): Update OAuthLib to 1.6.4.0SharePoint Company Directory / Active Directory Self Service System: SharePoint Company Directory with AD Import: This is a very simple system which was designed for a Bank to allow users to update their contact information within SharePoint . Then this info ca...Simply Classified: v1.00.12: Comsite Simply Classified v1.00.12 - STABLE - Tested against DotNetNuke v4.9.5 and v5.2.x Bug Fixes/Enhancements: BUGFIX: Resolved issues with 1...sPATCH: sPatch v0.9: Completely Recoded with wxWidgetsFollowing Content is different to .NET Patcher no requirement for .NET Framework Manual patch was removed to av...SSAS Profiler Trace Scheduler: SSAS Profiler Trace Scheduler: AS Profiler Scheduler is a tool that will enable Scheduling of SQL AS Tracing using predefined Profiler Templates. For tracking different issues th...sysFix: sysfix build v5: A stable beta release, please refer to home page for further details.VOB2MKV: vob2mkv-1.0.4: This is a feature update of the VOB2MKV utility. The command-line parsing in the VOB2MKV application has been greatly improved. You can now get f...xnaWebcam: xnaWebcam 0.1: xnaWebcam 0.1 Program Version 0.1: -Show Webcam Device -Draw.String WebcamTexture.VideoDevice.Name.ToString() Instructions: 1. Plug-in your Webca...xnaWebcam: xnaWebcam 0.2: xnaWebcam 0.2 Version 0.2: -setResolution -Keys.Escape: this.Exit() << Exit the Game/Application. --- Version 0.1: -Show Webcam Device -Draw.Strin...xnaWebcam: xnaWebcam 0.21: xnaWebcam 0.2 Version 0.21: -Fix: Don't quit game/application after closing mainGameWindow -Fix: Text Position; Window.X, Window.Y --- Version 0.2...Xploit Game Engine: Xploit_1_1 Release: Added Features Multiple Mesh instancing.Xploit Game Engine: Xploit_1_1 Source Code: Updates Create multiple instances of the same Meshe using XModelMesh and XSkinnedMesh.Yakiimo3D: DX11 DirectCompute Buddhabrot Source and Binary: DX11 DirectCompute Buddhabrot/Nebulabrot source and binary.Most Popular ProjectsRawrWBFS ManagerASP.NET Ajax LibraryMicrosoft SQL Server Product Samples: DatabaseSilverlight ToolkitAJAX Control ToolkitWindows Presentation Foundation (WPF)LiveUpload to FacebookASP.NETMicrosoft SQL Server Community & SamplesMost Active ProjectsRawrjQuery Library for SharePoint Web ServicesBlogEngine.NETLINQ to TwitterManaged Extensibility FrameworkMicrosoft Biology FoundationFarseer Physics EngineN2 CMSNB_Store - Free DotNetNuke Ecommerce Catalog Modulepatterns & practices – Enterprise Library

  Read the article

• Asserting with JustMock

  In this post, i will be digging in a bit deep on Mock.Assert. This is the continuation from previous post and covers up the ways you can use assert for your mock expectations. I have used another traditional sample of Talisker that has a warehouse [Collaborator] and an order class [SUT] that will call upon the warehouse to see the stock and fill it up with items. Our sample, interface of warehouse and order looks similar to : public interface IWarehouse { bool HasInventory(string productName,...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

  Read the article

• T-4 Templates for ASP.NET Web Form Databound Control Friendly Logical Layers

  - by Mohammad Ashraful Alam

  I just released an open source project at codeplex, which includes a set of T-4 templates that will enable you to build ASP.NET Web Form Data Bound controls friendly testable logical layer based on Entity Framework 4.0 with just few clicks! In this open source project you will get Entity Framework 4.0 based T-4 templates for following types of logical layers: Data Access Layer: Entity Framework 4.0 provides excellent ORM data access layer. It also includes support for T-4 templates, as built-in code generation strategy in Visual Studio 2010, where we can customize default structure of data access layer based on Entity Framework. default structure of data access layer has been enhanced to get support for mock testing in Entity Framework 4.0 object model. Business Logic Layer: ASP.NET web form based data bound control friendly business logic layer, which will enable you few clicks to build data bound web applications on top of ASP.NET Web Form and Entity Framework 4.0 quickly with great support of mock testing. Download it to make your web development productive. Enjoy!

  Read the article

• Does Windows 7 Mobile look a bit like this???

  - by BizTalk Visionary

  Thanks to my work mate Dave Robinson we have a new mock-up of Windows Mobile..

  Read the article

• How can I unit test a class which requires a web service call?

  - by Chris Cooper

  I'm trying to test a class which calls some Hadoop web services. The code is pretty much of the form: method() { ...use Jersey client to create WebResource... ...make request... ...do something with response... } e.g. there is a create directory method, a create folder method etc. Given that the code is dealing with an external web service that I don't have control over, how can I unit test this? I could try and mock the web service client/responses but that breaks the guideline I've seen a lot recently: "Don't mock objects you don't own". I could set up a dummy web service implementation - would that still constitute a "unit test" or would it then be an integration test? Is it just not possible to unit test at this low a level - how would a TDD practitioner go about this?

  Read the article

• [News] Utiliser le framework de bouchon Moq

  Moq est un framework permettant de mettre en oeuvre les mock-objets destin?es aux phases de tests. Cet excellent article illustre le principe : " (...) it is intended to be straightforward and easy to use mocking framework that doesn?t require any prior knowledge of the mocking concepts. So, it doesn't requires deep learning curve from the developers. It takes full advantage of the .NET 3.5 expression trees and the lambda expressions. Any of the methods and properties of the mock object can be easily represented in the lambda expressions."

  Read the article

• Need an engine for MMO mockup

  - by Kayle

  What I don't need is an MMORPG engine, at the moment. What I do need is a flexible easy-to-use engine that I can make a mock-up with. I don't need support for more than 10 players in an instance, so any multiplayer platform is probably fine. I need an engine with which I can create the following core features: Waves of simple AI enemies that have specific objectives (move to point A, destroy target, move to point B). The units present can be between 50-200 in number. An over-the-shoulder view and the ability to control a team of 3 (like Mass Effect or the latest Dragon Age) Functioning inventory system Right now, all I can really think of is Unreal or Source. Any other suggestions? Again, this is a proving mock-up, not an actual MMO. I'm not terribly worried about the visual aspects as we just want to test mechanics. Note: Can write some scripts in Python, Ruby, or Lua, if necessary.

  Read the article

• Do we really need isolation frameworks to create stubs?

  - by Sandbox

  I have read this: http://martinfowler.com/articles/mocksArentStubs.html My concepts about a stub and a mock are clear. I understand the need of isolation frameworks like moq, rhinomocks and like to create a mock object. As mocks, participate in actual verfication of expectations. But why do we need these frameworks to create stubs. I would rather prefer rolling out a hand created stub and use it in various fixtures.

  Read the article

• instantiate spring bean via factory method

  - by Don

  Hi, I need to instantiate a Spring bean in the same manner as this Java code: MyClass foo = Mockito.mock(MyClass.class); The XML I need will look something like: <bean id="foo" class="Mockito" factory-method="mock"> <constructor-arg value="MyClass"/> </bean> I can't seem to find the correct syntax for passing a Class object as a parameter to the factory method. Thanks, Don

  Read the article

• How do you unit test a class that's meant to talk to data?

  - by Arda Xi

  I have a few repository classes that are meant to talk to different kinds of data, deriving from an IRepository interface laid out like so: In implementations, the code talks to a data source, be this a directory of XML files or a database or even just a cache. Is it possible to reliably unit test any of these implementations? I don't see a mock implementation working, because then I'm only testing the mock code and not the actual code.

  Read the article

• Mocking a concrete class : templates and avoiding conditional compilation

  - by AshirusNW

  I'm trying to testing a concrete object with this sort of structure. class Database { public: Database(Server server) : server_(server) {} int Query(const char* expression) { server_.Connect(); return server_.ExecuteQuery(); } private: Server server_; }; i.e. it has no virtual functions, let alone a well-defined interface. I want to a fake database which calls mock services for testing. Even worse, I want the same code to be either built against the real version or the fake so that the same testing code can both: Test the real Database implementation - for integration tests Test the fake implementation, which calls mock services To solve this, I'm using a templated fake, like this: #ifndef INTEGRATION_TESTS class FakeDatabase { public: FakeDatabase() : realDb_(mockServer_) {} int Query(const char* expression) { MOCK_EXPECT_CALL(mockServer_, Query, 3); return realDb_.Query(); } private: // in non-INTEGRATION_TESTS builds, Server is a mock Server with // extra testing methods that allows mocking Server mockServer_; Database realDb_; }; #endif template <class T> class TestDatabaseContainer { public: int Query(const char* expression) { int result = database_.Query(expression); std::cout << "LOG: " << result << endl; return result; } private: T database_; }; Edit: Note the fake Database must call the real Database (but with a mock Server). Now to switch between them I'm planning the following test framework: class DatabaseTests { public: #ifdef INTEGRATION_TESTS typedef TestDatabaseContainer<Database> TestDatabase ; #else typedef TestDatabaseContainer<FakeDatabase> TestDatabase ; #endif TestDatabase& GetDb() { return _testDatabase; } private: TestDatabase _testDatabase; }; class QueryTestCase : public DatabaseTests { public: void TestStep1() { ASSERT(GetDb().Query(static_cast<const char *>("")) == 3); return; } }; I'm not a big fan of that compile-time switching between the real and the fake. So, my question is: Whether there's a better way of switching between Database and FakeDatabase? For instance, is it possible to do it at runtime in a clean fashion? I like to avoid #ifdefs. Also, if anyone has a better way of making a fake class that mimics a concrete class, I'd appreciate it. I don't want to have templated code all over the actual test code (QueryTestCase class). Feel free to critique the code style itself, too. You can see a compiled version of this code on codepad.

  Read the article

• ASP.Net MVC Moq SetupGet

  - by Nicholas Murray

  Hi, I am starting out with TDD using Moq to Mock an interface that I have: public interface IDataService { void Commit(); TopListService TopLists { get; } } From the samples I have seen I would expect SetupGet (or Setup) to appear in the intellisense when I type var mockDataService = new Mock<IDataService>(); mockDataService. But it is missing. Could someone suggest why?

  Read the article

• Rhino Mocks - Do we really need stubs?

  - by Marcelo Oliveira

  If it's possible to change mock behaviour in Rhino Mocks using mock.Stub().Return(), why do we need Stubs anyway? What do we lose by always using MockRepository.GenerateMock()? One big benefit of using Mocks instead of Stubs is that we will be able to reuse the same instance among all the tests keeping them cleaner and straightforward. The moq framework works in a similar way... we don't have different objects for mocks and stubs. (please, don't answer with a link to Fowler's "Mocks aren't stubs" article)

  Read the article

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