Search Results

Search found 10170 results on 407 pages for 'regression testing'.

Page 111/407 | < Previous Page | 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118  | Next Page >

  • Second Unit Test Not Running

    - by TomJ
    I am having trouble getting my Method B test to run. The logic is fine, but when the unit tests are run, only Method A will run. If Method A and B are switched in terms of spots, only Method B will run. So clearly the code is wrong at some point. Do I need to call method B's test from inside method A in order to get both unit tests to run? I'm pretty new to C#, so forgive my basic question. using redacted; using Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting; using System; namespace UnitTests { [TestClass()] public class ClassTest { public TestContext TestContext{get;set;} [TestMethod()] public void MethodATest() { the unit test } [TestMethod()] public void MethodBTest() { the unit test } } }

    Read the article

  • Argument constraints in RhinoMock methods

    - by Khash
    I am mocking a repository that should have 1 entity in it for the test scenario. The repository has to return this entity based on a known id and return nothing when other ids are passed in. I have tried doing something like this: _myRepository.Expect(item => item.Find(knownId)).Return(knownEntity); _myRepository.Expect(item => item.Find(Arg<Guid>.Is.Anything)).Return(null); It seems however the second line is overriding the first and the repository always returns null. I don't want to mock all the different possible IDs asked (they could go up to hundreds) when the test scenario is only concerned with the value of one Id.

    Read the article

  • Is PetraVM Jinx Beta 1 good?

    - by Brian T Hannan
    PetraVM recently came out with a Beta release of their Jinx product. Has anyone checked it out yet? Any feedback? By good, I mean: 1) easy to use 2) intuitive 3) useful 4) doesn't take a lot of code to integrate ... those kinds of things. Thanks guys!

    Read the article

  • Does new JUnit 4.8 @Category render test suites almost obsolete?

    - by grigory
    Given question 'How to run all tests belonging to a certain Category?' and the answer would the following approach be better for test organization? define master test suite that contains all tests (e.g. using ClasspathSuite) design sufficient set of JUnit categories (sufficient means that every desirable collection of sets is identifiable using one or more categories) define targeted test suites based on master test suite and set of categories For example: identify categories for speed (slow, fast), dependencies (mock, database, integration), function (), domain ( demand that each test is properly qualified (tagged) with relevant set of categories. create master test suite using ClasspathSuite (all tests found in classpath) create targeted suites by qualifying master test suite with categories, e.g. mock test suite, fast database test suite, slow integration for domain X test suite, etc. My question is more like soliciting approval rate for such approach vs. classic test suite approach. One unbeatable benefit is that every new test is immediately contained by relevant suites with no suite maintenance. One concern is proper categorization of each test.

    Read the article

  • Does anyone know what causes this error? VC++ with VisualAssert

    - by TerryJohnson
    Hi does anyone know what causes this error? In Visual Studio 2008 with Visual Assert Thanks 1>------ Build started: Project: ChessRound1, Configuration: Debug Win32 ------ 1>Compiling... 1>stdafx.cpp 1>C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 9.0\VC\include\xlocnum(135) : error C2857: '#include' statement specified with the /Ycstdafx.h command-line option was not found in the source file 1>Build log was saved at "file://c:\Users\Admin1\Documents\Visual Studio 2008\Projects\ChessRound1\ChessRound1\Debug\BuildLog.htm" 1>ChessRound1 - 1 error(s), 0 warning(s) ========== Build: 0 succeeded, 1 failed, 0 up-to-date, 0 skipped ==========

    Read the article

  • How can I use the compile time constant __LINE__ in a string?

    - by John
    I can use __LINE__ as a method parameter just fine, but I would like an easy way to use it in a function that uses strings. For instance say I have this: 11 string myTest() 12 { 13 if(!testCondition) 14 return logError("testcondition failed"); 15 } And I want the result of the function to be: "myTest line 14: testcondition failed" How can I write logError? Does it have to be some monstrosity of a macro?

    Read the article

  • HTTP Proxy with monitor UI for local install

    - by zedoo
    Hi, I'm looking for an HTTP Proxy/GUI combination that should be installed locally on my Windows PC. The UI should display something similar to Firebugs "Network" tab, showing request/response headers and content as plaintext. It would be cool if I could attach requests to a sort of node for later comparison, similar to what you can do when using the Proxy that comes with JMeter.

    Read the article

  • Is there a library available which easily can record and replay results of API calls?

    - by Billy ONeal
    I'm working on writing various things that call relatively complicated Win32 API functions. Here's an example: //Encapsulates calling NtQuerySystemInformation buffer management. WindowsApi::AutoArray NtDll::NtQuerySystemInformation( SystemInformationClass toGet ) const { AutoArray result; ULONG allocationSize = 1024; ULONG previousSize; NTSTATUS errorCheck; do { previousSize = allocationSize; result.Allocate(allocationSize); errorCheck = WinQuerySystemInformation(toGet, result.GetAs<void>(), allocationSize, &allocationSize); if (allocationSize <= previousSize) allocationSize = previousSize * 2; } while (errorCheck == 0xC0000004L); if (errorCheck != 0) { THROW_MANUAL_WINDOWS_ERROR(WinRtlNtStatusToDosError(errorCheck)); } return result; } //Client of the above. ProcessSnapshot::ProcessSnapshot() { using Dll::NtDll; NtDll ntdll; AutoArray systemInfoBuffer = ntdll.NtQuerySystemInformation( NtDll::SystemProcessInformation); BYTE * currentPtr = systemInfoBuffer.GetAs<BYTE>(); //Loop through the results, creating Process objects. SYSTEM_PROCESSES * asSysInfo; do { // Loop book keeping asSysInfo = reinterpret_cast<SYSTEM_PROCESSES *>(currentPtr); currentPtr += asSysInfo->NextEntryDelta; //Create the process for the current iteration and fill it with data. std::auto_ptr<ProcImpl> currentProc(ProcFactory( static_cast<unsigned __int32>(asSysInfo->ProcessId), this)); NormalProcess* nptr = dynamic_cast<NormalProcess*>(currentProc.get()); if (nptr) { nptr->SetProcessName(asSysInfo->ProcessName); } // Populate process threads for(ULONG idx = 0; idx < asSysInfo->ThreadCount; ++idx) { SYSTEM_THREADS& sysThread = asSysInfo->Threads[idx]; Thread thread( currentProc.get(), static_cast<unsigned __int32>(sysThread.ClientId.UniqueThread), sysThread.StartAddress); currentProc->AddThread(thread); } processes.push_back(currentProc); } while(asSysInfo->NextEntryDelta != 0); } My problem is in mocking out the NtDll::NtQuerySystemInformation method -- namely, that the data structure returned is complicated (Well, here it's actually relatively simple but it can be complicated), and writing a test which builds the data structure like the API call does can take 5-6 times as long as writing the code that uses the API. What I'd like to do is take a call to the API, and record it somehow, so that I can return that recorded value to the code under test without actually calling the API. The returned structures cannot simply be memcpy'd, because they often contain inner pointers (pointers to other locations in the same buffer). The library in question would need to check for these kinds of things, and be able to restore pointer values to a similar buffer upon replay. (i.e. check each pointer sized value if it could be interpreted as a pointer within the buffer, change that to an offset, and remember to change it back to a pointer on replay -- a false positive rate here is acceptable) Is there anything out there that does anything like this?

    Read the article

  • How to unit tests functions which return results asyncronously in XCode?

    - by DevDevDev
    I have something like - (void)getData:(SomeParameter*)param { // Remotely call out for data returned asynchronously // returns data via a delegate method } - (void)handleDataDelegateMethod:(NSData*)data { // Handle returned data } I want to write a unit test for this, how can I do something better than NSData* returnedData = nil; - (void)handleDataDelegateMethod:(NSData*)data { returnedData = data; } - (void)test { [obj getData:param]; while (!returnedData) { [NSThread sleep:1]; } // Make tests on returnedData }

    Read the article

  • How to access Dispatcher in Silverlight tests?

    - by bluebit
    I am using the SL unit test framework for tests (http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/silverlightut). My code is heavily client-server communications dependant, and I access the GUI dispatcher in several places to make sure important data is only accessed on a single thread (ie. the GUI thread). This dispatcher seems unavailable in the unit tests - I have tried using Deployment.Current.Dispatcher and even created an instance of a blank control to try use its own dispatcher, but both don't work. The code inside of Dispatcher.BeginInvoke() just never executes, even if I include a Thread.Sleep afterwards.

    Read the article

  • Django test client gets 301 redirection when accessing url

    - by Michal Klich
    I am writing unittests for django views. I have observed that one of my views returns redirection code 301, which is not expected. Here is my views.py mentioned earlier. def index(request): return render(request, 'index.html', {'form': QueryForm()}) def query(request): if request.is_ajax(): form = QueryForm(request.POST) return HttpResponse('valid') Below is urls.py. urlpatterns = patterns('', url(r'^$', 'core.views.index'), url(r'^query/$', 'core.views.query') ) And unittest that will fail. def so_test(self): response = self.client.post('/') self.assertEquals(response.status_code, 200) response = self.client.post('/query', {}) self.assertEquals(response.status_code, 200) My question is: why there is status 301 returned?

    Read the article

  • Unit test helper methods?

    - by Aly
    Hi, I have classes which prviously had massive methods so i subdivided the work of this method into 'helper' methods. These helper methods are declared private to enforce encapsulation - however I want to unit test the big public methods, is it good to unit test the helper methods too as if one of them fail the public method that calls it will also fail - but this way we can identify why it failed. Also in order to test these using a mock object I would need to change their visibility from private to protected, is this desirable?

    Read the article

  • Test-driven Development: Writing tests for private / protected variables

    - by Chetan
    I'm learning TDD, and I have a question about private / protected variables. My question is: If a function I want to test is operating on a private variable, how should I test it? Here is the example I'm working with: I have a class called Table that contains an instance variable called internalRepresentation that is a 2D array. I want to create a function called multiplyValuesByN that multiplies all the values in the 2D array by the argument n. So I write the test for it (in Python): def test_multiplyValuesByN (self): t = Table(3, 3) # 3x3 table, filled with 0's t.set(0, 0, 4) # Set value at position (0,0) to 4 t.multiplyValuesByN(3) assertEqual(t.internalRepresentation, [[12, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0]]) Now, if I make internalRepresentation private or protected, this test will not work. How am I supposed to write the test so it doesn't depend on internalRepresentation but still tests that it looks correct after calling multiplyValuesByN?

    Read the article

  • FRIEND_TEST in Google Test - possible circular dependency?

    - by Mihaela
    I am trying to figure out how FRIEND_TEST works in Google Tests. http://code.google.com/p/googletest/wiki/AdvancedGuide#Private_Class_Members I am looking at the following item, trying to implement it in my code: // foo.h #include "gtest/gtest_prod.h" // Defines FRIEND_TEST. class Foo { ... private: FRIEND_TEST(FooTest, BarReturnsZeroOnNull); int Bar(void* x); }; // foo_test.cc ... TEST(FooTest, BarReturnsZeroOnNull) { Foo foo; EXPECT_EQ(0, foo.Bar(NULL)); // Uses Foo's private member Bar(). } In the code above, the piece that I can't see, is that foo_test.cc must include foo.h, in order to have access to Foo and Bar(). [Perhaps it works differently for Google ? in my code, I must include it] That will result in circular dependency... Am I missing something ?

    Read the article

  • Detecting use after free() on windows.

    - by The Rook
    I'm trying to detect "Use after free()" bugs, otherwise known as "Dangling pointers". I know Valgrind can be used to detect "Use after free" bugs on the *nix platform, but what about windows? What if I don't have the source? Is there a better program than Valgrind for detecting all dangling pointers in a program? A free and open source would be preferred , but I'll use a commercial solution if it will get the job done.

    Read the article

  • How to build a test suite in watir?

    - by karlthorwald
    I have some single watir.rb scripts that use IE and are written in a standard watir way. How do I create a test suite that combines them? Is it possible to enumerate the files that should be included in the test suite? Is it possible to auto include single test files into a test suite by subidr? Can I cascade (include other watir suites in watir suites)?

    Read the article

  • Rails Functional Test Failing Due to Association

    - by Koby
    I have an accounts model that holds some basic account info (account name, website, etc). I then have a user model that has the following in the app/models/user.rb belongs_to :account I also have the following in my routes.rb map.resources :account, :has_many => [:users, :othermodel] the problem I'm facing is that the following test is failing: test "should create user" do assert_difference('User.count') do post :create, :user => { } #this is the line it's actually failing on end assert_redirected_to user_path(assigns(:user)) #it doesn't get here yet end The error it gives is "Can't find Account without ID" so I kind of understand WHY it's failing, because of the fact that it doesn't have the account object (or account_id as it were) to know under what account to create the user. I have tried variations of the following but I am completely lost: post :create, :user => { accounts(:one) } #I have the 'fixtures :accounts' syntax at the top of the test class post :create, [accounts(:one), :user] => { } post :create, :user => { accounts(:one), #other params for :user } and like I said, just about every variation I could think of. I can't find much documentation on doing this and this might be why people have moved to Factories for doing test data, but I want to understand things that come standard in Rails before moving onto other things. Can anyone help me get this working?

    Read the article

  • Is there a Java unit-test framework that auto-tests getters and setters?

    - by Michael Easter
    There is a well-known debate in Java (and other communities, I'm sure) whether or not trivial getter/setter methods should be tested. Usually, this is with respect to code coverage. Let's agree that this is an open debate, and not try to answer it here. There have been several blog posts on using Java reflection to auto-test such methods. Does any framework (e.g. jUnit) provide such a feature? e.g. An annotation that says "this test T should auto-test all the getters/setters on class C, because I assert that they are standard". It seems to me that it would add value, and if it were configurable, the 'debate' would be left as an option to the user.

    Read the article

  • When mocking a class with Moq, how can I CallBase for just specific methods?

    - by Daryn
    I really appreciate Moq's Loose mocking behaviour that returns default values when no expectations are set. It's convenient and saves me code, and it also acts as a safety measure: dependencies won't get unintentionally called during the unit test (as long as they are virtual). However, I'm confused about how to keep these benefits when the method under test happens to be virtual. In this case I do want to call the real code for that one method, while still having the rest of the class loosely mocked. All I have found in my searching is that I could set mock.CallBase = true to ensure that the method gets called. However, that affects the whole class. I don't want to do that because it puts me in a dilemma about all the other properties and methods in the class that hide call dependencies: if CallBase is true then I have to either Setup stubs for all of the properties and methods that hide dependencies -- Even though my test doesn't think it needs to care about those dependencies, or Hope that I don't forget to Setup any stubs (and that no new dependencies get added to the code in the future) -- Risk unit tests hitting a real dependency. Q: With Moq, is there any way to test a virtual method, when I mocked the class to stub just a few dependencies? I.e. Without resorting to CallBase=true and having to stub all of the dependencies? Example code to illustrate (uses MSTest, InternalsVisibleTo DynamicProxyGenAssembly2) In the following example, TestNonVirtualMethod passes, but TestVirtualMethod fails - returns null. public class Foo { public string NonVirtualMethod() { return GetDependencyA(); } public virtual string VirtualMethod() { return GetDependencyA();} internal virtual string GetDependencyA() { return "! Hit REAL Dependency A !"; } // [... Possibly many other dependencies ...] internal virtual string GetDependencyN() { return "! Hit REAL Dependency N !"; } } [TestClass] public class UnitTest1 { [TestMethod] public void TestNonVirtualMethod() { var mockFoo = new Mock<Foo>(); mockFoo.Setup(m => m.GetDependencyA()).Returns(expectedResultString); string result = mockFoo.Object.NonVirtualMethod(); Assert.AreEqual(expectedResultString, result); } [TestMethod] public void TestVirtualMethod() // Fails { var mockFoo = new Mock<Foo>(); mockFoo.Setup(m => m.GetDependencyA()).Returns(expectedResultString); // (I don't want to setup GetDependencyB ... GetDependencyN here) string result = mockFoo.Object.VirtualMethod(); Assert.AreEqual(expectedResultString, result); } string expectedResultString = "Hit mock dependency A - OK"; }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118  | Next Page >