Search Results

Search found 14702 results on 589 pages for 'testing logic'.

Page 131/589 | < Previous Page | 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • Is it possible to spoof or reuse VIEWSTATE or detect if it is protected from modification?

    - by Peter Jaric
    Question ASP and ASP.NET web applications use a value called VIEWSTATE in forms. From what I understand, this is used to persist some kind of state on the client between requests to the web server. I have never worked with ASP or ASP.NET and need some help with two questions (and some sub-questions): 1) Is it possible to programmatically spoof/construct a VIEWSTATE for a form? Clarification: can a program look at a form and from that construct the contents of the base64-encoded VIEWSTATE value? 1 a) Or can it always just be left out? 1 b) Can an old VIEWSTATE for a particular form be reused in a later invocation of the same form, or would it just be luck if that worked? 2) I gather from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms972976.aspx#viewstate_topic12 that it is possible to turn on security so that the VIEWSTATE becomes secure from spoofing. Is it possible for a program to detect that a VIEWSTATE is safeguarded in such a way? 2 a) Is there a one-to-one mapping between the occurrence of EVENTVALIDATION values and secure VIEWSTATEs? Regarding 1) and 2), if yes, can I have a hint about how I would do that? For 2) I am thinking I could base64-decode the value and search for a string that always is found in unencrypted VIEWSTATEs. "First:"? Something else? Background I have made a small tool for detecting and exploiting so called CSRF vulnerabilities. I use it to quickly make proof of concepts of such vulnerabilities that I send to the affected site owners. Quite often I encounter these forms with a VIEWSTATE, and these I don't know if they are secure or not. Edit 1: Clarified question 1 somewhat. Edit 2: Added text in italics.

    Read the article

  • Is there a JUnit equivalent to NUnit's testcase attribute?

    - by Steph
    I've googled for JUnit test case, and it comes up with something that looks a lot more complicated to implement - where you have to create a new class that extends test case which you then call: public class MathTest extends TestCase { protected double fValue1; protected double fValue2; protected void setUp() { fValue1= 2.0; fValue2= 3.0; } } public void testAdd() { double result= fValue1 + fValue2; assertTrue(result == 5.0); } but what I want is something really simple, like the NUnit test cases [TestCase(1,2)] [TestCase(3,4)] public void testAdd(int fValue1, int fValue2) { double result= fValue1 + fValue2; assertIsTrue(result == 5.0); } Is there any way to do this in JUnit?

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to run NUnit 2.5.3 tests in Gallio?

    - by Allrameest
    When I try to run NUnit tests in resharper I get this: Detected a probable test framework assembly version mismatch. Referenced test frameworks: 'nunit.framework, Version=2.5.3.9345, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=96d09a1eb7f44a77'. Supported test frameworks: 'nunit.framework, Version=2.5.0.0-2.5.2.65535', 'nunit.framework, Version=2.4.8.0-2.4.8.65535'. I use Gallio v3.1 build 397.

    Read the article

  • Is there an equivalent to RSpec's before(:all) in MiniTest?

    - by bergyman
    Since it now seems to have replaced TestUnit in 1.9.1, I can't seem to find an equivalent to this. There ARE times when you really just want a method to run once for the suite of tests. For now I've resorted to some lovely hackery along the lines of: Class ParseStandardWindTest < MiniTest::Unit::TestCase @@reader ||= PolicyDataReader.new(Time.now) @@data ||= @@reader.parse def test_stuff transaction = @@data[:transaction] assert true, transaction end end

    Read the article

  • Using fixtures with factory_girl

    - by deb
    When building the following factory: Factory.define :user do |f| f.sequence(:name) { |n| "foo#{n}" } f.resume_type_id { ResumeType.first.id } end ResumeType.first returns nil and I get an error. ResumeType records are loaded via fixtures. I checked using the console and the entries are there, the table is not empty. I've found a similar example in the factory_girl mailing list, and it's supposed to work. What am I missing? Do I have to somehow tell factory_girl to set up the fixtures before running the tests?

    Read the article

  • Default Values Specflow Step Definitions

    - by Gavin Osborn
    I'm starting out in the world of SpecFlow and I have come across my first problem. In terms of keeping my code DRY I'd like to do the following: Have two scenarios: Given I am on a product page And myfield equals todays date Then... Given I am on a product page And myfield equals todays date plus 4 days Then... I was hoping to use the following Step Definition to cover both variants of my And clause: [Given(@"myfield equals todays date(?: (plus|minus) (\d+) days)?")] public void MyfieldEqualsTodaysDate(string direction, int? days) { //do stuff } However I keep getting exceptions when SpecFlow tries to parse the int? param. I've checked the regular expression and it definitely parses the scenario as expected. I'm aware that I could so something as crude as method overloading etc, I was just wondering if SpecFlow supported the idea of default parameter values, or indeed another way to achieve the same effect. Many Thanks

    Read the article

  • Boost Test dynamically or statically linked?

    - by Halt
    We use Boost statically linked with our app but now I wan't to use Boost Test with an external test runner and that requires the tests themselves to link dynamically with Boost.Test through the use of the required BOOST_TEST_DYN_LINK define. Is this going to be a problem or is the way Boost Test links completely unrelated to the way the other Boost libraries are linked? Thx.

    Read the article

  • What's your development setup? (Talking right now to my boss)

    - by Flinkman
    How do I tell my boss, that I need endless cpu power to automate my daily job? By the way, what's your setup, now in sep, 2008. How fast disks? How much memory? How many cores? How big screen? (Ok, what the hell are you doing, you may ask. I'm working in multiple environments, vmware. Have couple of build-systems running, for compatibility tests. These build systems are automated. The setup of the build system is also. Is there an another way?) Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Missing Test Settings template in VS2010 Ultimate

    - by JustLoren
    I'm attempting to add a Test Settings file to my Unit Tests project in VS2010. All websites seem to simply say "Go to Add New Item Installed Templates Test Settings". However, I don't have Test Settings as an option in my Installed Templates (nor does searching for them online turn up any results). Can someone point me in the right direction for what I need to do?

    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

  • Detecting use after free() on windows. (dangling pointers)

    - 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

  • Visual Studio 2010 and Test Driven Development

    - by devoured elysium
    I'm making my first steps in Test Driven Development with Visual Studio. I have some questions regarding how to implement generic classes with VS 2010. First, let's say I want to implement my own version of an ArrayList. I start by creating the following test (I'm using in this case MSTest): [TestMethod] public void Add_10_Items_Remove_10_Items_Check_Size_Is_Zero() { var myArrayList = new MyArrayList<int>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i) { myArrayList.Add(i); } for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i) { myArrayList.RemoveAt(0); } int expected = 0; int actual = myArrayList.Size; Assert.AreEqual(expected, actual); } I'm using VS 2010 ability to hit ctrl + . and have it implement classes/methods on the go. I have been getting some trouble when implementing generic classes. For example, when I define an .Add(10) method, VS doesn't know if I intend a generic method(as the class is generic) or an Add(int number) method. Is there any way to differentiate this? The same can happen with return types. Let's assume I'm implementing a MyStack stack and I want to test if after I push and element and pop it, the stack is still empty. We all know pop should return something, but usually, the code of this test shouldn't care for it. Visual Studio would then think that pop is a void method, which in fact is not what one would want. How to deal with this? For each method, should I start by making tests that are "very specific" such as is obvious the method should return something so I don't get this kind of ambiguity? Even if not using the result, should I have something like int popValue = myStack.Pop() ? How should I do tests to generic classes? Only test with one generic kind of type? I have been using ints, as they are easy to use, but should I also test with different kinds of objects? How do you usually approach this? I see there is a popular tool called TestDriven for .NET. With VS 2010 release, is it still useful, or a lot of its features are now part of VS 2010, rendering it kinda useless? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Unitesting JSPs

    - by Avi Y
    Hi, I would like to ask you what technologies exist out there for creating unitests for JSPs. I am already aware of the HtmlUnit/HttpUnit/JWebUnit/Selenium possibilities. Thank you!

    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

  • 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

  • Junit 4 test suite and individual test classes

    - by Hypnus
    I have a JUnit 4 test suite with BeforeClass and AfterClass methods that make a setup/teardown for the following test classes. What I need is to run the test classes also by them selves, but for that I need a setup/teardown scenario (BeforeClass and AfterClass or something like that) for each test class. The thing is that when I run the suite I do not want to execute the setup/teardown before and after each test class, I only want to execute the setup/teardown from the test suite (once). Is it possible ? Thanks in advance.

    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

< Previous Page | 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138  | Next Page >