Search Results

Search found 11400 results on 456 pages for 'automated testing'.

Page 121/456 | < Previous Page | 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128  | Next Page >

  • Unit Test Sessions Window Closes when debugging

    - by Daniel Dyson
    When I select an NUnit test in the Unit Test Sessions window and click debug, the window disappears. My breakpoints are hit, but if I hit F5, the Unit Test Sessions window does not return until the test returns a result or I stop the debugging session. This is preventing me from viewing any console output during tests. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Rails test across multiple environments

    - by DSimon
    Is there some way to change Rails environments mid-way through a test? Or, alternately, what would be the right way to set up a test suite that can start up Rails in one environment, run the first half of my test in it, then restart Rails in another environment to finish the test? The two environments have separate databases. Some necessary context: I'm writing a Rails plugin that allows multiple installations of a Rails app to communicate with each other with user assistance, so that a user without Internet access can still use the app. They'll run a local version of an app, and upload their work to the online app by saving a file to a thumbdrive and taking it to an Internet cafe. The plugin adds two special environments to Rails: "offline-production" and "offline-test". I want to write functional tests that involve both the "test" and "offline-test" environments, to represent the main online version of the app and the local offline version of the app respectively.

    Read the article

  • where is "create instance" menu in visual studio 2010?

    - by austin powers
    Hi, in visual studio 2008 there is a sub-menu called "create instance" which is resides in class designer. Today I've opened VS.net 2010 and then opened class designer and create my class over there and when I wanted to test my class with the help of "create instance" option there was no such option available in vs.net 2010. and I've googled about it a little bit but no answer at all so I decided to mention about it here. where can I find this menu in vs.net 2010? regards.

    Read the article

  • Python: How to run unittest.main() for all source files in a subdirectory?

    - by Pete
    I am developing a Python module with several source files, each with its own test class derived from unittest right in the source. Consider the directory structure: dirFoo\ test.py dirBar\ __init__.py Foo.py Bar.py To test either Foo.py or Bar.py, I would add this at the end of the Foo.py and Bar.py source files: if __name__ == "__main__": unittest.main() And run Python on either source, i.e. $ python Foo.py ........... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 11 tests in 2.314s OK Ideally, I would have "test.py" automagically search dirBar for any unittest derived classes and make one call to "unittest.main()". What's the best way to do this in practice? I tried using Python to call execfile for every *.py file in dirBar, which runs once for the first .py file found & exits the calling test.py, plus then I have to duplicate my code by adding unittest.main() in every source file--which violates DRY principles.

    Read the article

  • Element not found blocks execution in Selenium

    - by Mariano
    In my test, I try to verify if certain text exists (after an action) using find_element_by_xpath. If I use the right expression and my test pass, the routine ends correctly in no time. However if I try a wrong text (meaning that the test will fail) it hangs forever and I have to kill the script otherwise it does not end. Here is my test (the expression Thx user, client or password you entered is incorrect does not exist in the system, no matter what the user does): # -*- coding: utf-8 -*- import gettext import unittest from selenium import webdriver class TestWrongLogin(unittest.TestCase): def setUp(self): self.driver = webdriver.Firefox() self.driver.get("http://10.23.1.104:8888/") # let's check the language try: self.lang = self.driver.execute_script("return navigator.language;") self.lang = self.lang("-")[0] except: self.lang = "en" language = gettext.translation('app', '/app/locale', [self.lang], fallback=True) language.install() self._ = gettext.gettext def tearDown(self): self.driver.quit() def test_wrong_client(self): # test wrong client inputElement = self.driver.find_element_by_name("login") inputElement.send_keys("root") inputElement = self.driver.find_element_by_name("client") inputElement.send_keys("Unleash") inputElement = self.driver.find_element_by_name("password") inputElement.send_keys("qwerty") self.driver.find_element_by_name("form.submitted").click() # wait for the db answer self.driver.implicitly_wait(10) ret = self.driver.find_element_by_xpath( "//*[contains(.,'{0}')]".\ format(self._(u"Thx user, client or password you entered is incorrect"))) self.assertTrue(isinstance(ret, webdriver.remote.webelement.WebElement)) if __name__ == '__main__': unittest.main() Why does it do that and how can I prevent it?

    Read the article

  • is there a less bloated way to test constraints in grails?

    - by egervari
    Is there a less bloated way to test constraints? It seems to me that this is too much code to test constraints. class BlogPostTests extends GrailsUnitTestCase { protected void setUp() { super.setUp() mockDomain BlogPost } void testConstraints() { BlogPost blogPost = new BlogPost(title: "", text: "") assertFalse blogPost.validate() assertEquals 2, blogPost.errors.getErrorCount() assertEquals "blank", blogPost.errors.getFieldError("title").getCode() assertEquals "blank", blogPost.errors.getFieldError("text").getCode() blogPost = new BlogPost(title: "title", text: ObjectMother.bigText(2001)) assertFalse blogPost.validate() assertEquals 1, blogPost.errors.getErrorCount() assertEquals "maxSize.exceeded", blogPost.errors.getFieldError("text").getCode() } }

    Read the article

  • What is the most idiomatic way to emulating Perl's Test::More::done_testing?

    - by DVK
    I have to build unit tests for in environment with a very old version of Test::More (perl5.8 with $Test::More::VERSION being '0.80') which predates the addition of done_testing(). Upgrading to newer Test::More is out of the question for practical reasons. And I am trying to avoid using no_tests - it's generally a bad idea not catching when your unit test exits prematurely - say due to some logic not executing when you expected it to. What is the most idiomatic way of running a configurable amount of tests, assuming no no_tests or done_testing() is used? Details: My unit tests usually take the form of: use Test::More; my @test_set = ( [ "Test #1", $param1, $param2, ... ] ,[ "Test #1", $param1, $param2, ... ] # ,... ); foreach my $test (@test_set) { run_test($test); } sub run_test { # $expected_tests += count_tests($test); ok(test1($test)) || diag("Test1 failed"); # ... } The standard approach of use Test::More tests => 23; or BEGIN {plan tests => 23} does not work since both are obviously executed before @tests is known. My current approach involves making @tests global and defining it in the BEGIN {} block as follows: use Test::More; BEGIN { our @test_set = (); # Same set of tests as above my $expected_tests = 0; foreach my $test (@tests) { my $expected_tests += count_tests($test); } plan tests = $expected_tests; } our @test_set; # Must do!!! Since first "our" was in BEGIN's scope :( foreach my $test (@test_set) { run_test($test); } # Same sub run_test {} # Same I feel this can be done more idiomatically but not certain how to improve. Chief among the smells is the duplicate our @test_test declarations - in BEGIN{} and after it. Another approach is to emulate done_testing() by calling Test::More->builder->plan(tests=>$total_tests_calculated). I'm not sure if it's any better idiomatically-wise.

    Read the article

  • Given a short (2-week) sprint, is it ever acceptable to forgo TDD to "get things done"?

    - by Ben Aston
    Given a short sprint, is it ever acceptable to forgo TDD to "get things done" within the sprint. For example a given piece of work might need say 1/3 of the sprint to design the object model around an existing implementation. Under this scenario you might well end up with implemented code, say half way through the sprint, without any tests (implementing unit tests during this "design" stage would add significant effort and the tests would likely be thrown away a few times until the final "design" is settled upon). You might then spend a day or two in the second week adding in unit / integration tests after the fact. Is this acceptable?

    Read the article

  • Measuring the CPU frequency scaling effect

    - by Bryan Fok
    Recently I am trying to measure the effect of the cpu scaling. Is it accurate if I use this clock to measure it? template<std::intmax_t clock_freq> struct rdtsc_clock { typedef unsigned long long rep; typedef std::ratio<1, clock_freq> period; typedef std::chrono::duration<rep, period> duration; typedef std::chrono::time_point<rdtsc_clock> time_point; static const bool is_steady = true; static time_point now() noexcept { unsigned lo, hi; asm volatile("rdtsc" : "=a" (lo), "=d" (hi)); return time_point(duration(static_cast<rep>(hi) << 32 | lo)); } }; Update: According to the comment from my another post, I believe redtsc cannot use for measure the effect of cpu frequency scaling because the counter from the redtsc does not affected by the CPU frequency, am i right?

    Read the article

  • How do I connect StaticListableBeanFactory with ClassPathXmlApplicationContext?

    - by Aaron Digulla
    In the setup of my test cases, I have this code: ApplicationContext context = new ClassPathXmlApplicationContext( "spring/common.xml" ); StaticListableBeanFactory testBeanFactory = new StaticListableBeanFactory(); How do I connect the two in such a way that tests can register beans in the testBeanFactory during setup and the rest of the application uses them instead of the ones defined in common.xml? Note: I need to mix a static (common.xml) and a dynamic configuration. I can't use XML for the latter because that would mean to write 1000 XML files.

    Read the article

  • Where should I put common utility functions for Perl .t tests?

    - by zedoo
    I am getting started with Test::More, already have a few .t test scripts. Now I'd like to define a function that will only be used for the tests, but across different .t files. Where's the best place to put such a function? Define another .t without any tests and require it where needed? (As a sidenote I use the module structure created by Module::Starter)

    Read the article

  • How to flush coverage data when my test cause app crash - For ios app

    - by Ypy
    I want to get the code coverage of my tests. So I set the settings, build an app with .gcno files and run it on simulator. It can get the coverage data successfully if there is no crash issue. But if the app crashed, I will get nothing. So how can I get the code coverage data when the app crash? In my thought, this is because it will not call __gcov_flush() method when app crash. I only add app does not run in background to my plist file, so __gcov_flush() is called only at the time I press Home button. Is there any way to call __gcov_flush() before the app crash?

    Read the article

  • How to test soft deletion event listner without setting up NHibernate Sessions

    - by isuruceanu
    I have overridden the default NHibernate DefaultDeleteEventListener according to this source: http://nhforge.org/blogs/nhibernate/archive/2008/09/06/soft-deletes.aspx so I have protected override void DeleteEntity( IEventSource session, object entity, EntityEntry entityEntry, bool isCascadeDeleteEnabled, IEntityPersister persister, ISet transientEntities) { if (entity is ISoftDeletable) { var e = (ISoftDeletable)entity; e.DateDeleted = DateTime.Now; CascadeBeforeDelete(session, persister, entity, entityEntry, transientEntities); CascadeAfterDelete(session, persister, entity, transientEntities); } else { base.DeleteEntity(session, entity, entityEntry, isCascadeDeleteEnabled, persister, transientEntities); } } How can I test only this piece of code, without configuring an NHIbernate Session?

    Read the article

  • 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

  • Fluent NHibernate CheckProperty and Dates

    - by Chris C
    I setup a NUnit test as such: new PersistenceSpecification<MyTable>(_session) .CheckProperty(c => c.ActionDate, DateTime.Now); When I run the test via NUnit I get the following error: SomeNamespace.MapTest: System.ApplicationException : Expected '2/23/2010 11:08:38 AM' but got '2/23/2010 11:08:38 AM' for Property 'ActionDate' The ActionDate field is a datetime field in a SQL 2008 database. I use Auto Mapping and declare the ActionDate as a DateTime property in C#. If I change the test to use DateTime.Today the tests pass. My question is why is the test failing with DateTime.Now? Is NHibernate losing some precision when saving the date to the database and if so how do prevent the lose? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Configure lua prosody for localhost only

    - by Alfred
    I want to use prosody or maybe another xmpp server to test my xmpp bot. I want it to only accept connection from the address/localhost(don't want to configure firewall to block access). I would like to know the easiest way to accomplish this.

    Read the article

  • C# why unit test has this strange behaviour?

    - by 5YrsLaterDBA
    I have a class to encrypt the connectionString. public class SKM { private string connStrName = "AndeDBEntities"; internal void encryptConnStr() { if(isConnStrEncrypted()) return; ... } private bool isConnStrEncrypted() { bool status = false; // Open app.config of executable. System.Configuration.Configuration config = ConfigurationManager.OpenExeConfiguration(ConfigurationUserLevel.None); // Get the connection string from the app.config file. string connStr = config.ConnectionStrings.ConnectionStrings[connStrName].ConnectionString; status = !(connStr.Contains("provider")); Log.logItem(LogType.DebugDevelopment, "isConnStrEncrypted", "SKM::isConnStrEncrypted()", "isConnStrEncrypted=" + status); return status; } } Above code works fine in my application. But not in my unit test project. In my unit test project, I test the encryptConnStr() method. it will call isConnStrEncrypted() method. Then exception (null pointer) will be thrown at this line: string connStr = config.ConnectionStrings.ConnectionStrings[connStrName].ConnectionString; I have to use index like this to pass the unit test: string connStr = config.ConnectionStrings.ConnectionStrings[0].ConnectionString; I remember it worked several days ago at the time I added above unit test. But now it give me an error. The unit test is not integrated with our daily auto build yet. We only have ONE connectionStr. It works with product but not in unit test. Don't know why. Anybody can explain to me?

    Read the article

  • How do I fix my Unit Test to have global access to everything?

    - by SLC
    Usually when you add one (in Visual Basic), it pops up a message asking if you want to enable an option that lets the test access things like private methods etc. However, I am editing a solution that does not have this enabled. I'd like to enable it so my unit tests will work, but I can't find the setting. Can anyone tell me how to enable it after the project has been created?

    Read the article

  • How to test Gem Extensions in Rails

    - by rube_noob
    I have written an extension to an existing gem (that is stored in lib) and a corresponding test for my extension. How could I go about running the gem's tests as well as my own automatically. What is the best practice for this case?

    Read the article

  • Recipe for creating a corrupt mysql table

    - by Chaim Geretz
    We had a process that crashed while trying to manipulate an expected mysql record set, running the offending query from the mysql cli showed the following. mysql SELECT ...; ERROR 1030: Got error 127 from table handler Is there a way to easily recreate this condition so we can validate our fix ? (production DB was already repaired).

    Read the article

  • Not Able to call The method Asynchronously in the Unit Test.

    - by user43838
    Hi everyone, I am trying to call a method that passes an object called parameters. public void LoadingDataLockFunctionalityTest() { DataCache_Accessor target = DataCacheTest.getNewDataCacheInstance(); target.itemsLoading.Add("WebFx.Caching.TestDataRetrieverFactorytestsync", true); DataParameters parameters = new DataParameters("WebFx.Core", "WebFx.Caching.TestDataRetrieverFactory", "testsync"); parameters.CachingStrategy = CachingStrategy.TimerDontWait; parameters.CacheDuration = 0; string data = (string)target.performGetForTimerDontWaitStrategy(parameters); TestSyncDataRetriever.SimulateLoadingForFiveSeconds = true; Thread t1 = new Thread(delegate() { string s = (string)target.performGetForTimerDontWaitStrategy(parameters); Console.WriteLine(s ?? String.Empty); }); t1.Start(); t1.Join(); Thread.Sleep(1000); ReaderWriterLockSlim rw = DataCache_Accessor.GetLoadingLock(parameters); Assert.IsTrue(rw.IsWriteLockHeld); Assert.IsNotNull(data); } My test is failing all the time and i am not able step through the method.. Can someone please put me in the right direction Thanks

    Read the article

  • Simulating interaction between two users in Jmeter

    - by Victoria
    I have to register two users and simulate interaction between them (for example, a conversation). I can do the following: register the first user, then register the second, sign in using first user's data, write message to the second user and sign out. Then sign in using the second user's data, answer to the message and sign out. Is it possible to implement users' conversation without signing out if the system requires enabled cookies for users?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128  | Next Page >