Search Results

Search found 22986 results on 920 pages for 'allocation unit size'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 112/920 | < Previous Page | 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119  | Next Page >

  • Run PHPUnit Tests in Certain Order

    - by dragonmantank
    Is there a way to get the tests inside of a TestCase to run in a certain order? For example, I want to seperate the lifecycle of an object from creation to use to destruction but need to make sure that the object is set up first before I run the other tests.

    Read the article

  • Stubbing a before_filter with RSpec

    - by TheDelChop
    Guys, I'm having trouble understanding why I can't seem to stub this controller method :load_user, since all of my tests fail if I change the actual implementation of :load_user to not return and instance of @user. Can anybody see why my stub (controller.stub!(:load_user).and_return(@user)) seems to fail to actually get called when RSpec makes a request to the controller? require 'spec_helper' describe TasksController do before(:each) do @user = Factory(:user) sign_in @user @task = Factory(:task) User.stub_chain(:where, :first).and_return(@user) controller.stub!(:load_user).and_return(@user) end #GET Index describe "GET Index" do before(:each) do @tasks = 7.times{Factory(:task, :user = @user)} @user.stub!(:tasks).and_return(@tasks) end it "should should find all of the tasks owned by a user" do @user.should_receive(:tasks).and_return(@tasks) get :index, :user_id = @user.id end it "should assign all of the user's tasks to the view" do get :index, :user_id = @user.id assigns[:tasks].should be(@tasks) end end #GET New describe "GET New" do before(:each) do @user.stub_chain(:tasks, :new).and_return(@task) end it "should return a new Task" do @user.tasks.should_receive(:new).and_return(@task) get :new, :user_id = @user.id end end #POST Create describe "POST Create" do before(:each) do @user.stub_chain(:tasks, :new).and_return(@task) end it "should create a new task" do @user.tasks.should_receive(:new).and_return(@task) post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task.to_s end it "saves the task" do @task.should_receive(:save) post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task end context "when the task is saved successfully" do before(:each) do @task.stub!(:save).and_return(true) end it "should set the flash[:notice] message to 'Task Added Successfully'"do post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task flash[:notice].should == "Task Added Successfully!" end it "should redirect to the user's task page" do post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task response.should redirect_to(user_tasks_path(@user.id)) end end context "when the task isn't saved successfully" do before(:each) do @task.stub(:save).and_return(false) end it "should return to the 'Create New Task' page do" do post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task response.should render_template('new') end end end it "should attempt to authenticate and load the user who owns the tasks" do context "when the tasks belong to the currently logged in user" do it "should set the user instance variable to the currently logged in user" do pending end end context "when the tasks belong to another user" do it "should set the flash[:notice] to 'Sorry but you can't view other people's tasks.'" do pending end it "should redirect to the home page" do pending end end end end class TasksController < ApplicationController before_filter :load_user def index @tasks = @user.tasks end def new @task = @user.tasks.new end def create @task = @user.tasks.new if @task.save flash[:notice] = "Task Added Successfully!" redirect_to user_tasks_path(@user.id) else render :action => 'new' end end private def load_user if current_user.id == params[:user_id].to_i @user = User.where(:id => params[:user_id]).first else flash[:notice] = "Sorry but you can't view other people's tasks." redirect_to root_path end end end Can anybody see why my stub doesnt' work? Like I said, my tests only pass if I make sure that load_user works, if not, all my tests fail which makes my think that RSpec isn't using the stub I created. Thanks, Joe

    Read the article

  • Running single test class or group with Surefire and TestNG

    - by Slartibartfast
    I want to run single test class from command line using Maven and TestNG Things that doesn't work: mvn -Dtest=ClassName test I have defined groups in pom.xml, and this class isn't in one of those groups. So it got excluded on those grounds. mvn -Dgroups=skipped-group test mvn -Dsurefire.groups=skipped-group test when config is <plugin> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId> <artifactId>maven-surefire-plugin</artifactId> <version>2.7.1</version> <configuration> <groups>functest</groups> </configuration> </plugin> Parameters work fine in there are no groups defined in pom.xml. Similarly, when surefire is configured with <configuration> <includes> <include>**/*UnitTest.java</include> </includes> </configuration> I can add another test with -Dtest parameter, but cannot add group. In any combination, I can narrow down tests to be executed with groups, but not expand them. What's wrong with my configuration? Is there a way to run a single test or group outside of those defined in pom.xml? Tried on Ubuntu 10.04 with Maven 2.2.1, TestNG 5.14.6 and Surefire 2.7.1

    Read the article

  • DDSteps date question.

    - by Srini
    DDStep Date Question: Currently trying to pass just the date from excel. But getting the below error while doing it. Failed to convert property value of type [java.lang.String] to required type [java.util.Date] for property ...no matching editors or conversion strategy found spring for date conversion I even tried to add customEditorConfigurer in the ddsteps-context file. Still getting error. But in their pet store example looks like it works fine. Any help is appreciated. <entry key="java.util.Date"> <bean class="org.springframework.beans.propertyeditors.CustomDateEditor"> <constructor-arg> <bean class="java.text.SimpleDateFormat"> <constructor-arg value="yyyy-MM-dd" /> </bean> </constructor-arg> <constructor-arg value="false" /> </bean> </entry>

    Read the article

  • How to map a test onto a list of numbers

    - by Arthur Ulfeldt
    I have a function with a bug: user> (-> 42 int-to-bytes bytes-to-int) 42 user> (-> 128 int-to-bytes bytes-to-int) -128 user> looks like I need to handle overflow when converting back... Better write a test to make sure this never happens again. This project is using clojure.contrib.test-is so i write: (deftest int-to-bytes-to-int (let [lots-of-big-numbers (big-test-numbers)] (map #(is (= (-> % int-to-bytes bytes-to-int) %)) lots-of-big-numbers))) This should be testing converting to a seq of bytes and back again produces the origional result on a list of 10000 random numbers. Looks OK in theory? except none of the tests ever run. Testing com.cryptovide.miscTest Ran 23 tests containing 34 assertions. 0 failures, 0 errors. why don't the tests run? what can I do to make them run?

    Read the article

  • What's the use of writing tests matching configuration-like code line by line?

    - by Pascal Van Hecke
    Hi, I have been wondering about the usefulness of writing tests that match code one-by-one. Just an example: in Rails, you can define 7 restful routes in one line in routes.rb using: resources :products BDD/TDD proscribes you test first and then write code. In order to test the full effect of this line, devs come up with macros e.g. for shoulda: http://kconrails.com/2010/01/27/route-testing-with-shoulda-in-ruby-on-rails/ class RoutingTest < ActionController::TestCase # simple should_map_resources :products end I'm not trying to pick on the guy that wrote the macros, this is just an example of a pattern that I see all over Rails. I'm just wondering what the use of it is... in the end you're just duplicating code and the only thing you test is that Rails works. You could as well write a tool that transforms your test macros into actual code... When I ask around, people answer me that: "the tests should document your code, so yes it makes sense to write them, even if it's just one line corresponding to one line" What are your thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Perl, strings, floats, unit testing and regexps!

    - by Chris R
    OK, as a preface this question potentially is 'stupider' than my normal level of question - however this problem has been annoying me for the last few days so I'll ask it anyway. I'll give a mock example of what my problem is so I can hope to generalize it to my current problem. #!/usr/bin/perl -w use strict; use Test::More 'no_plan'; my $fruit_string = 'Apples cost $1.50'; my ($fruit, $price) = $fruit_string =~ /(\w+)s cost \$(\d+\.\d+)/; # $price += 0; # Uncomment for Great Success is ($price, 1.50, 'Great Success'); Now when this is run I get the message # Failed test 'Great Success' # got: '1.50' # expected: '1.5' To make the test work - I either uncomment the commented line, or use is ($price, '1.50', 'Great Success'). Both options do not work for me - I'm testing a huge amount of nested data using Test::Deep and cmp_deeply. My question is, how can you extract a double from a regexp then use it immediately as a double - or if there is a better way altogether let me know - and feel free to tell me to take up gardening or something lol, learning Perl is hard.

    Read the article

  • Test assertions for tuples with floats

    - by Space_C0wb0y
    I have a function that returns a tuple that, among others, contains a float value. Usually I use assertAlmostEquals to compare those, but this does not work with tuples. Also, the tuple contains other data-types as well. Currently I am asserting every element of the tuple individually, but that gets too much for a list of such tuples. Is there any good way to write assertions for such cases?

    Read the article

  • Nested Resource testing RSpec

    - by Joseph DelCioppio
    I have two models: class Solution < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :owner, :class_name => "User", :foreign_key => :user_id end class User < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :solutions end with the following routing: map.resources :users, :has_many => :solutions and here is the SolutionsController: class SolutionsController < ApplicationController before_filter :load_user def index @solutions = @user.solutions end private def load_user @user = User.find(params[:user_id]) unless params[:user_id].nil? end end Can anybody help me with writing a test for the index action? So far I have tried the following but it doesn't work: describe SolutionsController do before(:each) do @user = Factory.create(:user) @solutions = 7.times{Factory.build(:solution, :owner => @user)} @user.stub!(:solutions).and_return(@solutions) end it "should find all of the solutions owned by a user" do @user.should_receive(:solutions) get :index, :user_id => @user.id end end And I get the following error: Spec::Mocks::MockExpectationError in 'SolutionsController GET index, when the user owns the software he is viewing should find all of the solutions owned by a user' #<User:0x000000041c53e0> expected :solutions with (any args) once, but received it 0 times Thanks in advance for all the help. Joe

    Read the article

  • Is Assert.Fail() considered bad practice?

    - by Mendelt
    I use Assert.Fail a lot when doing TDD. I'm usually working on one test at a time but when I get ideas for things I want to implement later I quickly write an empty test where the name of the test method indicates what I want to implement as sort of a todo-list. To make sure I don't forget I put an Assert.Fail() in the body. When trying out xUnit.Net I found they hadn't implemented Assert.Fail. Of course you can always Assert.IsTrue(false) but this doesn't communicate my intention as well. I got the impression Assert.Fail wasn't implemented on purpose. Is this considered bad practice? If so why? @Martin Meredith That's not exactly what I do. I do write a test first and then implement code to make it work. Usually I think of several tests at once. Or I think about a test to write when I'm working on something else. That's when I write an empty failing test to remember. By the time I get to writing the test I neatly work test-first. @Jimmeh That looks like a good idea. Ignored tests don't fail but they still show up in a separate list. Have to try that out. @Matt Howells Great Idea. NotImplementedException communicates intention better than assert.Fail() in this case @Mitch Wheat That's what I was looking for. It seems it was left out to prevent it being abused in another way I abuse it.

    Read the article

  • Reflection in unit tests for checking code coverage

    - by Gary
    Here's the scenario. I have VO (Value Objects) or DTO objects that are just containers for data. When I take those and split them apart for saving into a DB that (for lots of reasons) doesn't map to the VO's elegantly, I want to test to see if each field is successfully being created in the database and successfully read back in to rebuild the VO. Is there a way I can test that my tests cover every field in the VO? I had an idea about using reflection to iterate through the fields of the VO's as part of the solution, but maybe you guys have solved the problem before? I want this test to fail when I add fields in the VO, and don't remember to add checks for it in my tests.

    Read the article

  • Log information inside a JUnit Suite

    - by Alex Marinescu
    I'm currently trying to write inside a log file the total number of failed tests from a JUnite Suite. My testsuite is defined as follows: @RunWith(Suite.class) @SuiteClasses({Class1.class, Class2.class etc.}) public class SimpleTestSuite {} I tried to define a rule which would increase the total number of errors when a test fails, but apparently my rule is never called. @Rule public MethodRule logWatchRule = new TestWatchman() { public void failed(Throwable e, FrameworkMethod method) { errors += 1; } public void succeeded(FrameworkMethod method) { } }; Any ideas on what I should to do to achieve this behaviour?

    Read the article

  • Why should I be using testing frameworks in PHP?

    - by Industrial
    Hi everyone, I have recently heard a lot of people argue about using PHP testing features like PHPunit and SimpleTest together with their IDE of choice (Eclipse for me). After googling the subject, I have still a hard time understanding the pros and cons of using these testing frameworks to speed up development. If anyone could explain this for me in a more basic level, I would really appreciate it. I am using PHP5 for the notice. Thanks a lot!

    Read the article

  • How to write automated tests for SQL queries?

    - by James
    The current system we are adopting at work is to write some extremely complex queries which perform multiple calculations and have multiple joins / sub-queries. I don't think I am experienced enough to say if this is correct or not so I am agreeing and attempting to function with this system as it has clear benefits. The problem we are having at the moment is that the person writing the queries makes a lot of mistakes and assumes everything is correct. We have now assigned a tester to analyse all of the queries but this still proves extremely time consuming and stressful. I would like to know how we could create an automated procedure (without specifically writing it with code if possible as I can work out how to do that the long way) to verify a set of 10+ different inputs, verify the output data and say if the calculations are correct. I know I could write a script using specific data in the database and create a script using c# (the db is SQL Server) and verify all the values coming out but I would like to know what the official "standard" is as my experience is lacking in this area and I would like to improve. I am happy to add more information if required, add a comment if necessary. Thank you. Edit: I am using c#

    Read the article

  • Multiple asserts in single test?

    - by Gern Blandston
    Let's say I want to write a function that validates an email address with a regex. I write a little test to check my function and write the actual function. Make it pass. However, I can come up with a bunch of different ways to test the same function ([email protected]; [email protected]; test.test.com, etc). Do I put all the incantations that I need to check in the same, single test with several ASSERTS or do I write a new test for every single thing I can think of? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Using Assert to compare two objects

    - by baron
    Hi everyone, Writing test cases for my project, one test I need is to test deletion. This may not exactly be the right way to go about it, but I've stumbled upon something which isn't making sense to me. Code is like this: [Test] private void DeleteFruit() { BuildTestData(); var f1 = new Fruit("Banana",1,1.5); var f2 = new Fruit("Apple",1,1.5); fm.DeleteFruit(f1,listOfFruit); Assert.That(listOfFruit[1] == f2); } Now the fruit object I create line 5 is the object that I know should be in that position (with this specific dataset) after f1 is deleted. Also if I sit and debug, and manually compare objects listOfFruit[1] and f2 they are the same. But that Assert line fails. What gives?

    Read the article

  • Force orientation change in testcase with fragments

    - by user1202032
    I have an Android test project in which I wish to programatically change the orientation. My test: public class MainActivityLandscapeTest extends ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2<MainActivity> { public MainActivityLandscapeTest() { super(MainActivity.class); } private MainActivity mActivity; private Fragment mDetailFragment; private Fragment mListFragment; private Solo mSolo; @Override protected void setUp() throws Exception { super.setUp(); mSolo = new Solo(getInstrumentation(), getActivity()); mSolo.setActivityOrientation(Solo.LANDSCAPE); mActivity = getActivity(); mListFragment = (Fragment) mActivity.getSupportFragmentManager() .findFragmentById(R.id.listFragment); mDetailFragment = (Fragment) mActivity.getSupportFragmentManager() .findFragmentById(R.id.detailFragment); } public void testPreConditions() { assertTrue(mActivity != null); assertTrue(mSolo != null); assertTrue(mListFragment != null); assertTrue(getActivity().getResources().getConfiguration().orientation == Configuration.ORIENTATION_LANDSCAPE); } /** * Only show detailFragment in landscape mode */ public void testOrientation() { assertTrue(mListFragment.isVisible()); assertTrue(mDetailFragment.isVisible()); } } The layouts for the activity is in seperate folders, layout-port and layout-land layout-port fragment_main.xml layout-land fragment_main.xml In landscape mode, the layout contains 2 fragments (Detail and list) while in portrait it contains 1(List only). If the device/emulator is already in landscape mode before testing begins, this test passes. If in portrait, it fails with a NullPointerException on mListFragment and mDetailFragment. Adding a delay (waitForIdleSync() and/or waitForActivity()) did NOT seem to solve my problem. How do i force the orientation to landscape in my test, while still being able to find the fragments using findFragmentById()?

    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 test a site rigorously?

    - by Sarfraz
    Hello, I recently created a big portal site. It's time for putting it to test. How do you guys test a site rigorously? What are the ways and tools for that? Can we sort of mimic hundreds of virtual users visiting the site to see its load handling? The test should be for both security and speed Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119  | Next Page >