Search Results

Search found 458 results on 19 pages for 'nunit'.

Page 15/19 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >

  • How to run SpecFlow tests in Visual Studio 2010?

    - by testerboy
    Trying to get SpecFlow running with a fresh VS2010 Professional install. Created a new console application and added references to NUnit and SpecFlow. Created a SpecFlow feature. The .feature with the default template code is created. Now I try to run this test, but I don't understand how. When I right-click the project (at the top-level), there is no "Run test(s)" option in the mouse drop down menu. Didn't the SpecFlow install correctly, am I missing some references or some other tool I need to install?

    Read the article

  • Integrating Hudson with MS Test?

    - by hangy
    Is it possible to integrate Hudson with MS Test? I am setting up a smaller CI server on my development machine with Hudson right now, just so that I can have some statistics (ie. FxCop and compiler warnings). Of course, it would also be nice if it could just run my unit tests and present their output. Up to now, I have added the following batch task to Hudson, which makes it run the tests properly. "%PROGRAMFILES%\Microsoft Visual Studio 9.0\Common7\IDE\MSTest.exe" /runconfig:LocalTestRun.testrunconfig /testcontainer:Tests\bin\Debug\Tests.dll However, as far as I know, Hudson does not support analysis of MS Test results, yet. Does anyone know whether the TRX files generated by MSTest.exe can be transformed to the JUnit or NUnit result format (because those are supported by Hudson), or whether there is any other way to integrate MS Test unit tests with Hudson?

    Read the article

  • Embeddable unit testing framework for mixed Windows app

    - by Andy Dent
    I want to test portions of a very complex app which includes both a major native Windows component and a substantial WPF GUI. Due to complexities I can't detail, it is impossible to run the native portion independently nor can I isolate the areas I want to test (spare me the lectures, we're talking a huge legacy code base and we do have refactoring plans). I'm looking for a unit test kit I can invoke on the native side but must be able to run with the app launched with the managed portion initialised. That seems to rule out the run executable feature of the cfix Windows unit test kit. I really like their philosophy, like WinUnit, of using DLL compilation as a way to add the reflective capabilities missing in C++ and gain a more NUnit-like experience. Ideally, I want something like WinUnit running within the application code and generating an HTML report. I'm trying to introduce more TDD and having things as lean as possible is important.

    Read the article

  • Looking for Info on a Javascript Testing framework

    - by DaveDev
    Hi Can somebody fill me in on JavaScript Testing Frameworks? I'm working on a project now and as the JS (Mostly jQuery) libraries grow, it's getting more and more difficult to introduce change or refactor, because I have no way of guaranteeing the accuracy of the code without manually testing everything. I don't really know anything about JavaScript Testing Frameworks, or how they integrate/operate in a .Net project, so I thought I'd ask here. What would a good testing framework be for .Net? What does a JavaScript test look like? (e.g. with NUnit, I have [TestFixture] classes & [Test] methods in a ProjectTests assembly) How do I run a javascript test? What are the conceptual differences between testing JS & testing C#? Is there anything else that would be worth knowing? Thanks Dave

    Read the article

  • Working effectively with unit tests / Anyone tried the in-assembly approach?

    - by CodingCrapper
    I'm trying to re-introduce unit testing into my team as our current coverage is very poor. Our system is quite large 40+ projects/assemblies. We current use a project named [SystemName].Test.csproj were all the test code is dumped and organised to represent the namespaces using folders. This approach is not very scalable and makes it difficult to find tests. I've been thinking about added a Tests folder to each project, this would put the unit tests "in the developers face" and make them easy to find. The downside is the Production release code would contain references to nunit, nmocks as well as the test code and test data.... Has anyone tried this approach? How is everyone else working with unit tests on large projects? Having a Tests project per "real" project/assembly would introduce too many new projs. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Microsoft Team System Equivalent stack.

    - by Nix
    I am looking for a free alternative to TS. What would be the best alternative stack(source control, bug tracking, project management/planning, wiki, automated builds (ci))? Keeping in mind that it would be nice if they all integrated well. For example, it would be nice to be able to link bugs to source control, and then be able to link to a project plan and then be able to automate building. I do not have issues with using Microsoft project to manage project planing. I know i would like to use these....: SVN TeamCity NUnit But i am struggling to find a good Wiki/Project Planning/Bug tracking, that would integrate well. Any questions let me know.

    Read the article

  • Best way to do TDD in express versions of visual studio(eg VB Express)

    - by Nathan W
    I have been looking in to doing some test driven development for one of the applications that I'm currently writing(OLE wrapper for an OLE object). The only problem is that I am using the express versions of Visual Studio(for now), at the moment I am using VB express but sometimes I use C# express. Is it possible to do TDD in the express versions? If so what are the bast was to go about it? Cheers. EDIT. By the looks of things I will have to buy the full visual studio so that I can do integrated TDD, hopefully there is money in the budget to buy a copy :). For now I think I will use Nunit like everyone is saying.

    Read the article

  • How to pass binaries build upstream to a remote downstream build slave

    - by sbi
    We're using hudson on Windows to build a .NET solution and run the unit tests (NUnit). Hudson is thereby used to start batch files that do the actual work. I am now trying to set up a new test that is to run on a build slave and will run very long. The test should use the binaries produced by the upstream build. I have searched the hudson documentation but I cannot find how to pass upstream build artifacts to downstream slaves. How do I do this?

    Read the article

  • Best Automation Frame work design

    - by Vijay Prasath
    Using Nunit Frame work or Creating Visual studio Test Projects which one is the best way to save the time and effective automation? Now i am using selenium IDE to script the maximum parts in my application to reduce the time of execution(i feel ide execution is faster than test project execution) using gotoif, while, regexp ..etc and would go Selenium RC only for data driven methods and the events which have not been handled by IDE. Please suggest me Am i in the right way? because i am in the beginning stage on Automating my applications asking this Question for early correction is better.

    Read the article

  • Expiring an IE session using WatiN

    - by Steve Wilkes
    I'm trying to write an acceptance test using WatiN which checks that a user is redirected to the login page if they navigate to a page after their session times out. I'm using WatiN's IE class for the browser, and trying the following: // 1. Login // 2. Do this: Browser.ClearCookies(); Browser.ClearCache(); // 3. Navigate to a different page But the user is always still logged in. Other info: I'm running the test through the NUnit GUI running as an administrator It's an ASP.NET MVC 3 site, using forms authentication and in-process session state I'm using IE9. If I manually clear all cookies in Chrome, the user is logged out If I manually clear all cookies in IE the user stays logged in If I call Browser.Eval("alert(document.cookie)"); in IE it alerts an empty string Given the above, I'm assuming this is a quirk with IE; any ideas how I can work around it?

    Read the article

  • PartCover and TeamCity

    - by jane doe
    I am using TeamCity to build via a solution file. I am attempting to get "PartCover" to work it. It is easy enough to point it to the partcover.exe, I am just unsure how to get team city to produce a proper report from the results of our nUnit test. I have added the a coverage.zip file to our setup and it is displaying the correct info under the artefacts tab, however under the code coverage tab the only info displayed is "Coverage by assembly" and nothing else. Any help or ideas would be great.

    Read the article

  • Improving the performance of an nHibernate Data Access Layer.

    - by Amitabh
    I am working on improving the performance of DataAccess Layer of an existing Asp.Net Web Application. The scenerios are. Its a web based application in Asp.Net. DataAccess layer is built using NHibernate 1.2 and exposed as WCF Service. The Entity class is marked with DataContract. Lazy loading is not used and because of the eager-fetching of the relations there is huge no of database objects are loaded in the memory. No of hits to the database is also high. For example I profiled the application using NHProfiler and there were about 50+ sql calls to load one of the Entity object using the primary key. I also can not change code much as its an existing live application with no NUnit test cases at all. Please can I get some suggestions here?

    Read the article

  • Receiving an Expectedmessage differs error

    - by Mark
    I am quite new to TDD and am going with NUnit and Moq. I have got a method where I expect an exception, so I wanted to play a little with the frameworks features. My test code looks as follows: [Test] [ExpectedException(ExpectedException = typeof(MockException), ExpectedMessage = "Actual differs from expected")] public void Write_MessageLogWithCategoryInfoFail() { string message = "Info Test Message"; Write_MessageLogWithCategory(message, "Info"); _LogTest.Verify(writeMessage => writeMessage.Info("This should fail"), "Actual differs from expected" ); } But I always receive the errormessage that the error message that the actual exception message differs from the expected message. What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Finding data file location while using Microsoft Test Framework

    - by Nair
    I have been using NUnit and now I am switching to the Microsoft Unit Test frame work. In my test project I have a folder called TestData and I kept all my test input data files there. I want to use that files for my unit testing. In my test code, I am using Application name space and assembly name space but I can not get to the data folder directly until unless I write a code to find and replace some string to point to the data folder. I am sure someone might have run into the same problem, is the solution to change the path through program or is there a API call which will let us get to executing assembly folders? Thanks,

    Read the article

  • C# Domain-Driven Design Sample Released

    - by Artur Trosin
    In the post I want to declare that NDDD Sample application(s) is released and share the work with you. You can access it here: http://code.google.com/p/ndddsample. NDDDSample from functionality perspective matches DDDSample 1.1.0 which is based Java and on joint effort by Eric Evans' company Domain Language and the Swedish software consulting company Citerus. But because NDDDSample is based on .NET technologies those two implementations could not be matched directly. However concepts, practices, values, patterns, especially DDD, are cross-language and cross-platform :). Implementation of .NET version of the application was an interesting journey because now as .NET developer I better understand the differences positive and negative between these two platforms. Even there are those differences they can be overtaken, in many cases it was not so hard to match a java libs\framework with .NET during the implementation. Here is a list of technology stack: 1. .net 3.5 - framework 2. VS.NET 2008 - IDE 3. ASP.NET MVC2.0 - for administration and tracking UI 4. WCF - communication mechanism 5. NHibernate - ORM 6. Rhino Commons - Nhibernate session management, base classes for in memory unit tests 7. SqlLite - database 8. Windsor - inversion of control container 9. Windsor WCF facility - for better integration with NHibernate 10. MvcContrib - and in particular its Castle WindsorControllerFactory in order to enable IoC for controllers 11. WPF - for incident logging application 12. Moq - mocking lib used for unit tests 13. NUnit - unit testing framework 14. Log4net - logging framework 15. Cloud based on Azure SDK These are not the latest technologies, tools and libs for the moment but if there are someone thinks that it would be useful to migrate the sample to latest current technologies and versions please comment. Cloud version of the application is based on Azure emulated environment provided by the SDK, so it hasn't been tested on ‘real' Azure scenario (we just do not have access to it). Thanks to participants, Eugen Gorgan who was involved directly in development, Ruslan Rusu and Victor Lungu spend their free time to discuss .NET specific decisions, Eugen Navitaniuc helped with Java related questions. Also, big thank to Cornel Cretu, he designed a nice logo and helped with some browser incompatibility issues. Any review and feedback are welcome! Thank you, Artur Trosin

    Read the article

  • Review: Backbone.js Testing

    - by george_v_reilly
    Title: Backbone.js Testing Author: Ryan Roemer Rating: $stars(4.5) Publisher: Packt Copyright: 2013 ISBN: 178216524X Pages: 168 Keywords: programming, testing, javascript, backbone, mocha, chai, sinon Reading period: October 2013 Backbone.js Testing is a short, dense introduction to testing JavaScript applications with three testing libraries, Mocha, Chai, and Sinon.JS. Although the author uses a sample application of a personal note manager written with Backbone.js throughout the book, much of the material would apply to any JavaScript client or server framework. Mocha is a test framework that can be executed in the browser or by Node.js, which runs your tests. Chai is a framework-agnostic TDD/BDD assertion library. Sinon.JS provides standalone test spies, stubs and mocks for JavaScript. They complement each other and the author does a good job of explaining when and how to use each. I've written a lot of tests in Python (unittest and mock, primarily) and C# (NUnit), but my experience with JavaScript unit testing was both limited and years out of date. The JavaScript ecosystem continues to evolve rapidly, with new browser frameworks and Node packages springing up everywhere. JavaScript has some particular challenges in testing—notably, asynchrony and callbacks. Mocha, Chai, and Sinon meet those challenges, though they can't take away all the pain. The author describes how to test Backbone models, views, and collections; dealing with asynchrony; provides useful testing heuristics, including isolating components to reduce dependencies; when to use stubs and mocks and fake servers; and test automation with PhantomJS. He does not, however, teach you Backbone.js itself; for that, you'll need another book. There are a few areas which I thought were dealt with too lightly. There's no real discussion of Test-driven_development or Behavior-driven_development, which provide the intellectual foundations of much of the book. Nor does he have much to say about testability and how to make legacy code more testable. The sample Notes app has plenty of testing seams (much of this falls naturally out of the architecture of Backbone); other apps are not so lucky. The chapter on automation is extremely terse—it could be expanded into a very large book!—but it does provide useful indicators to many areas for exploration. I learned a lot from this book and I have no hesitation in recommending it. Disclosure: Thanks to Ryan Roemer and Packt for a review copy of this book.

    Read the article

  • Size doesn't matter

    - by ssoolsma
    Whenever I start a new project I *always* break up my code in different projects. Also known as n-tier solution. The scale of  the project doesn't matter, but make sure that each project is responsible for himself (or herself if you prefer). I make sure that i ....At least thought about how the project should work on the toilet or in a project team meeting.Have a solution directory and create my projects within. I like to name my project (and it's folders by the namespaces). For instance: When i'm creating a piece of (web)software called: ChuckNorris, i always include the software name in my projects. Start off with designing the DataAccess project. I name it: ChuckNorris.DataAccess which lets me easily identify the project incase the project scales alot.Build the classes which represent the database structure. Don't stop working on a class untill it's finished for now. Also, don't over-do the methods. Build stuff only when it's needed, and not think: "Hm, that would be cool to have". Cause most of the time you end up with unused code, and we don't want that.Build a unittest project and make sure you create the folder inside the project that it's testing. So, create the ChuckNorris.DataAccess.UnitTest project inside the folder of the dataaccess project. I would suggest using the nUnit testframework.Incase you though, hm i skip unittest: Don't! Just build it - it will safe you alot of time later onNow, read 5 again. Build that bloody unittest. Don't skip. (i cant emphasize this enough)Now, every class in the dataaccess project is responsible for itself. They don't rely on each other. This is where we use the BusinessLogic project for. Start creating the ChuckNorris.BusinessLogic project. (not inside the data-access project ofcourse, but withing the ChuckNorris folder.Combine stuff from data-access. This usual involves alot of copying the data-access classes and feels silly at first. (we'll get to that later on)Now you come up to a point of creating a service project. You might not always see why to use it, but see it as a way to expose your businesslogic to any application (including your own). Sometimes i use it as a so-called "Factory". Every call goes through this factory, so that's the only thing i'm exposing to any program, and make sure that those methods are the only ones that I allow you to invoke.Build any UI (website, phoneapp, forms application, silverlight, wpf or whatever) and reference it to you service project. Fall in love (cough) with this approach.It's possible that it doesn't seem to make much sense, and very incomplete. Well, that last part is correct. Next post will go in to detail of setting up your Data-Access project and use the entity framework.

    Read the article

  • Profiling Startup Of VS2012 &ndash; Ants Profiler

    - by Alois Kraus
    I just downloaded ANTS Profiler 7.4 to check how fast it is and how deep I can analyze the startup of Visual Studio 2012. The Pro version which is useful does cost 445€ which is ok. To measure a complex system I decided to simply profile VS2012 (Update 1) on my older Intel 6600 2,4GHz with 3 GB RAM and a 32 bit Windows 7. Ants Profiler is really easy to use. So lets try it out. The Ants Profiler does want to start the profiled application by its own which seems to be rather common. I did choose Method Level timing of all managed methods. In the configuration menu I did want to get all call stacks to get full details. Once this is configured you are ready to go.   After that you can select the Method Grid to view Wall Clock Time in ms. I hate percentages which are on by default because I do want to look where absolute time is spent and not something else.   From the Method Grid I can drill down to see where time is spent in a nice and I can look at the decompiled methods where the time is spent. This does really look nice. But did you see the size of the scroll bar in the method grid? Although I wanted all call stacks I do get only about 4 pages of methods to drill down. From the scroll bar count I would guess that the profiler does show me about 150 methods for the complete VS startup. This is nonsense. I will never find a bottleneck in VS when I am presented only a fraction of the methods that were actually executed. I have also tried in the configuration window to also profile the extremely trivial functions but there was no noticeable difference. It seems that the Ants Profiler does filter away way too many details to be useful for bigger systems. If you want to optimize a CPU bound operation inside NUnit then Ants Profiler is with its line level timings a very nice tool to work with. But for bigger stuff it is certainly not usable. I also do not like that I must start the profiled application from the profiler UI. This makes it hard to profile processes which are started by some other process. Next: JetBrains dotTrace

    Read the article

  • Building applications with WCF - Intro

    - by skjagini
    I am going to write series of articles using Windows Communication Framework (WCF) to develop client and server applications and this is the first part of that series. What is WCF As Juwal puts in his Programming WCF book, WCF provides an SDK for developing and deploying services on Windows, provides runtime environment to expose CLR types as services and consume services as CLR types. Building services with WCF is incredibly easy and it’s implementation provides a set of industry standards and off the shelf plumbing including service hosting, instance management, reliability, transaction management, security etc such that it greatly increases productivity Scenario: Lets consider a typical bank customer trying to create an account, deposit amount and transfer funds between accounts, i.e. checking and savings. To make it interesting, we are going to divide the functionality into multiple services and each of them working with database directly. We will run test cases with and without transactional support across services. In this post we will build contracts, services, data access layer, unit tests to verify end to end communication etc, nothing big stuff here and we dig into other features of the WCF in subsequent posts with incremental changes. In any distributed architecture we have two pieces i.e. services and clients. Services as the name implies provide functionality to execute various pieces of business logic on the server, and clients providing interaction to the end user. Services can be built with Web Services or with WCF. Service built on WCF have the advantage of binding independent, i.e. can run against TCP and HTTP protocol without any significant changes to the code. Solution Services Profile: For creating a new bank customer, getting details about existing customer ProfileContract ProfileService Checking Account: To get checking account balance, deposit or withdraw amount CheckingAccountContract CheckingAccountService Savings Account: To get savings account balance, deposit or withdraw amount SavingsAccountContract SavingsAccountService ServiceHost: To host services, i.e. running the services at particular address, binding and contract where client can connect to Client: Helps end user to use services like creating account and amount transfer between the accounts BankDAL: Data access layer to work with database     BankDAL It’s no brainer not to use an ORM as many matured products are available currently in market including Linq2Sql, Entity Framework (EF), LLblGenPro etc. For this exercise I am going to use Entity Framework 4.0, CTP 5 with code first approach. There are two approaches when working with data, data driven and code driven. In data driven we start by designing tables and their constrains in database and generate entities in code while in code driven (code first) approach entities are defined in code and the metadata generated from the entities is used by the EF to create tables and table constrains. In previous versions the entity classes had  to derive from EF specific base classes. In EF 4 it  is not required to derive from any EF classes, the entities are not only persistence ignorant but also enable full test driven development using mock frameworks.  Application consists of 3 entities, Customer entity which contains Customer details; CheckingAccount and SavingsAccount to hold the respective account balance. We could have introduced an Account base class for CheckingAccount and SavingsAccount which is certainly possible with EF mappings but to keep it simple we are just going to follow 1 –1 mapping between entity and table mappings. Lets start out by defining a class called Customer which will be mapped to Customer table, observe that the class is simply a plain old clr object (POCO) and has no reference to EF at all. using System;   namespace BankDAL.Model { public class Customer { public int Id { get; set; } public string FullName { get; set; } public string Address { get; set; } public DateTime DateOfBirth { get; set; } } }   In order to inform EF about the Customer entity we have to define a database context with properties of type DbSet<> for every POCO which needs to be mapped to a table in database. EF uses convention over configuration to generate the metadata resulting in much less configuration. using System.Data.Entity;   namespace BankDAL.Model { public class BankDbContext: DbContext { public DbSet<Customer> Customers { get; set; } } }   Entity constrains can be defined through attributes on Customer class or using fluent syntax (no need to muscle with xml files), CustomerConfiguration class. By defining constrains in a separate class we can maintain clean POCOs without corrupting entity classes with database specific information.   using System; using System.Data.Entity.ModelConfiguration;   namespace BankDAL.Model { public class CustomerConfiguration: EntityTypeConfiguration<Customer> { public CustomerConfiguration() { Initialize(); }   private void Initialize() { //Setting the Primary Key this.HasKey(e => e.Id);   //Setting required fields this.HasRequired(e => e.FullName); this.HasRequired(e => e.Address); //Todo: Can't create required constraint as DateOfBirth is not reference type, research it //this.HasRequired(e => e.DateOfBirth); } } }   Any queries executed against Customers property in BankDbContext are executed against Cusomers table. By convention EF looks for connection string with key of BankDbContext when working with the context.   We are going to define a helper class to work with Customer entity with methods for querying, adding new entity etc and these are known as repository classes, i.e., CustomerRepository   using System; using System.Data.Entity; using System.Linq; using BankDAL.Model;   namespace BankDAL.Repositories { public class CustomerRepository { private readonly IDbSet<Customer> _customers;   public CustomerRepository(BankDbContext bankDbContext) { if (bankDbContext == null) throw new ArgumentNullException(); _customers = bankDbContext.Customers; }   public IQueryable<Customer> Query() { return _customers; }   public void Add(Customer customer) { _customers.Add(customer); } } }   From the above code it is observable that the Query methods returns customers as IQueryable i.e. customers are retrieved only when actually used i.e. iterated. Returning as IQueryable also allows to execute filtering and joining statements from business logic using lamba expressions without cluttering the data access layer with tens of methods.   Our CheckingAccountRepository and SavingsAccountRepository look very similar to each other using System; using System.Data.Entity; using System.Linq; using BankDAL.Model;   namespace BankDAL.Repositories { public class CheckingAccountRepository { private readonly IDbSet<CheckingAccount> _checkingAccounts;   public CheckingAccountRepository(BankDbContext bankDbContext) { if (bankDbContext == null) throw new ArgumentNullException(); _checkingAccounts = bankDbContext.CheckingAccounts; }   public IQueryable<CheckingAccount> Query() { return _checkingAccounts; }   public void Add(CheckingAccount account) { _checkingAccounts.Add(account); }   public IQueryable<CheckingAccount> GetAccount(int customerId) { return (from act in _checkingAccounts where act.CustomerId == customerId select act); }   } } The repository classes look very similar to each other for Query and Add methods, with the help of C# generics and implementing repository pattern (Martin Fowler) we can reduce the repeated code. Jarod from ElegantCode has posted an article on how to use repository pattern with EF which we will implement in the subsequent articles along with WCF Unity life time managers by Drew Contracts It is very easy to follow contract first approach with WCF, define the interface and append ServiceContract, OperationContract attributes. IProfile contract exposes functionality for creating customer and getting customer details.   using System; using System.ServiceModel; using BankDAL.Model;   namespace ProfileContract { [ServiceContract] public interface IProfile { [OperationContract] Customer CreateCustomer(string customerName, string address, DateTime dateOfBirth);   [OperationContract] Customer GetCustomer(int id);   } }   ICheckingAccount contract exposes functionality for working with checking account, i.e., getting balance, deposit and withdraw of amount. ISavingsAccount contract looks the same as checking account.   using System.ServiceModel;   namespace CheckingAccountContract { [ServiceContract] public interface ICheckingAccount { [OperationContract] decimal? GetCheckingAccountBalance(int customerId);   [OperationContract] void DepositAmount(int customerId,decimal amount);   [OperationContract] void WithdrawAmount(int customerId, decimal amount);   } }   Services   Having covered the data access layer and contracts so far and here comes the core of the business logic, i.e. services.   .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } ProfileService implements the IProfile contract for creating customer and getting customer detail using CustomerRepository. using System; using System.Linq; using System.ServiceModel; using BankDAL; using BankDAL.Model; using BankDAL.Repositories; using ProfileContract;   namespace ProfileService { [ServiceBehavior(IncludeExceptionDetailInFaults = true)] public class Profile: IProfile { public Customer CreateAccount( string customerName, string address, DateTime dateOfBirth) { Customer cust = new Customer { FullName = customerName, Address = address, DateOfBirth = dateOfBirth };   using (var bankDbContext = new BankDbContext()) { new CustomerRepository(bankDbContext).Add(cust); bankDbContext.SaveChanges(); } return cust; }   public Customer CreateCustomer(string customerName, string address, DateTime dateOfBirth) { return CreateAccount(customerName, address, dateOfBirth); } public Customer GetCustomer(int id) { return new CustomerRepository(new BankDbContext()).Query() .Where(i => i.Id == id).FirstOrDefault(); }   } } From the above code you shall observe that we are calling bankDBContext’s SaveChanges method and there is no save method specific to customer entity because EF manages all the changes centralized at the context level and all the pending changes so far are submitted in a batch and it is represented as Unit of Work. Similarly Checking service implements ICheckingAccount contract using CheckingAccountRepository, notice that we are throwing overdraft exception if the balance falls by zero. WCF has it’s own way of raising exceptions using fault contracts which will be explained in the subsequent articles. SavingsAccountService is similar to CheckingAccountService. using System; using System.Linq; using System.ServiceModel; using BankDAL.Model; using BankDAL.Repositories; using CheckingAccountContract;   namespace CheckingAccountService { [ServiceBehavior(IncludeExceptionDetailInFaults = true)] public class Checking:ICheckingAccount { public decimal? GetCheckingAccountBalance(int customerId) { using (var bankDbContext = new BankDbContext()) { CheckingAccount account = (new CheckingAccountRepository(bankDbContext) .GetAccount(customerId)).FirstOrDefault();   if (account != null) return account.Balance;   return null; } }   public void DepositAmount(int customerId, decimal amount) { using(var bankDbContext = new BankDbContext()) { var checkingAccountRepository = new CheckingAccountRepository(bankDbContext); CheckingAccount account = (checkingAccountRepository.GetAccount(customerId)) .FirstOrDefault();   if (account == null) { account = new CheckingAccount() { CustomerId = customerId }; checkingAccountRepository.Add(account); }   account.Balance = account.Balance + amount; if (account.Balance < 0) throw new ApplicationException("Overdraft not accepted");   bankDbContext.SaveChanges(); } } public void WithdrawAmount(int customerId, decimal amount) { DepositAmount(customerId, -1*amount); } } }   BankServiceHost The host acts as a glue binding contracts with it’s services, exposing the endpoints. The services can be exposed either through the code or configuration file, configuration file is preferred as it allows run time changes to service behavior even after deployment. We have 3 services and for each of the service you need to define name (the class that implements the service with fully qualified namespace) and endpoint known as ABC, i.e. address, binding and contract. We are using netTcpBinding and have defined the base address with for each of the contracts .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; } <system.serviceModel> <services> <service name="ProfileService.Profile"> <endpoint binding="netTcpBinding" contract="ProfileContract.IProfile"/> <host> <baseAddresses> <add baseAddress="net.tcp://localhost:1000/Profile"/> </baseAddresses> </host> </service> <service name="CheckingAccountService.Checking"> <endpoint binding="netTcpBinding" contract="CheckingAccountContract.ICheckingAccount"/> <host> <baseAddresses> <add baseAddress="net.tcp://localhost:1000/Checking"/> </baseAddresses> </host> </service> <service name="SavingsAccountService.Savings"> <endpoint binding="netTcpBinding" contract="SavingsAccountContract.ISavingsAccount"/> <host> <baseAddresses> <add baseAddress="net.tcp://localhost:1000/Savings"/> </baseAddresses> </host> </service> </services> </system.serviceModel> Have to open the services by creating service host which will handle the incoming requests from clients.   using System;   namespace ServiceHost { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { CreateHosts(); Console.ReadLine(); }   private static void CreateHosts() { CreateHost(typeof(ProfileService.Profile),"Profile Service"); CreateHost(typeof(SavingsAccountService.Savings), "Savings Account Service"); CreateHost(typeof(CheckingAccountService.Checking), "Checking Account Service"); }   private static void CreateHost(Type type, string hostDescription) { System.ServiceModel.ServiceHost host = new System.ServiceModel.ServiceHost(type); host.Open();   if (host.ChannelDispatchers != null && host.ChannelDispatchers.Count != 0 && host.ChannelDispatchers[0].Listener != null) Console.WriteLine("Started: " + host.ChannelDispatchers[0].Listener.Uri); else Console.WriteLine("Failed to start:" + hostDescription); } } } BankClient    The client has no knowledge about service business logic other than the functionality it exposes through the contract, end points and a proxy to work against. The endpoint data and server proxy can be generated by right clicking on the project reference and choosing ‘Add Service Reference’ and entering the service end point address. Or if you have access to source, you can manually reference contract dlls and update clients configuration file to point to the service end point if the server and client happens to be being built using .Net framework. One of the pros with the manual approach is you don’t have to work against messy code generated files.   <system.serviceModel> <client> <endpoint name="tcpProfile" address="net.tcp://localhost:1000/Profile" binding="netTcpBinding" contract="ProfileContract.IProfile"/> <endpoint name="tcpCheckingAccount" address="net.tcp://localhost:1000/Checking" binding="netTcpBinding" contract="CheckingAccountContract.ICheckingAccount"/> <endpoint name="tcpSavingsAccount" address="net.tcp://localhost:1000/Savings" binding="netTcpBinding" contract="SavingsAccountContract.ISavingsAccount"/>   </client> </system.serviceModel> The client uses a façade to connect to the services   using System.ServiceModel; using CheckingAccountContract; using ProfileContract; using SavingsAccountContract;   namespace Client { public class ProxyFacade { public static IProfile ProfileProxy() { return (new ChannelFactory<IProfile>("tcpProfile")).CreateChannel(); }   public static ICheckingAccount CheckingAccountProxy() { return (new ChannelFactory<ICheckingAccount>("tcpCheckingAccount")) .CreateChannel(); }   public static ISavingsAccount SavingsAccountProxy() { return (new ChannelFactory<ISavingsAccount>("tcpSavingsAccount")) .CreateChannel(); }   } }   With that in place, lets get our unit tests going   using System; using System.Diagnostics; using BankDAL.Model; using NUnit.Framework; using ProfileContract;   namespace Client { [TestFixture] public class Tests { private void TransferFundsFromSavingsToCheckingAccount(int customerId, decimal amount) { ProxyFacade.CheckingAccountProxy().DepositAmount(customerId, amount); ProxyFacade.SavingsAccountProxy().WithdrawAmount(customerId, amount); }   private void TransferFundsFromCheckingToSavingsAccount(int customerId, decimal amount) { ProxyFacade.SavingsAccountProxy().DepositAmount(customerId, amount); ProxyFacade.CheckingAccountProxy().WithdrawAmount(customerId, amount); }     [Test] public void CreateAndGetProfileTest() { IProfile profile = ProxyFacade.ProfileProxy(); const string customerName = "Tom"; int customerId = profile.CreateCustomer(customerName, "NJ", new DateTime(1982, 1, 1)).Id; Customer customer = profile.GetCustomer(customerId); Assert.AreEqual(customerName,customer.FullName); }   [Test] public void DepositWithDrawAndTransferAmountTest() { IProfile profile = ProxyFacade.ProfileProxy(); string customerName = "Smith" + DateTime.Now.ToString("HH:mm:ss"); var customer = profile.CreateCustomer(customerName, "NJ", new DateTime(1982, 1, 1)); // Deposit to Savings ProxyFacade.SavingsAccountProxy().DepositAmount(customer.Id, 100); ProxyFacade.SavingsAccountProxy().DepositAmount(customer.Id, 25); Assert.AreEqual(125, ProxyFacade.SavingsAccountProxy().GetSavingsAccountBalance(customer.Id)); // Withdraw ProxyFacade.SavingsAccountProxy().WithdrawAmount(customer.Id, 30); Assert.AreEqual(95, ProxyFacade.SavingsAccountProxy().GetSavingsAccountBalance(customer.Id));   // Deposit to Checking ProxyFacade.CheckingAccountProxy().DepositAmount(customer.Id, 60); ProxyFacade.CheckingAccountProxy().DepositAmount(customer.Id, 40); Assert.AreEqual(100, ProxyFacade.CheckingAccountProxy().GetCheckingAccountBalance(customer.Id)); // Withdraw ProxyFacade.CheckingAccountProxy().WithdrawAmount(customer.Id, 30); Assert.AreEqual(70, ProxyFacade.CheckingAccountProxy().GetCheckingAccountBalance(customer.Id));   // Transfer from Savings to Checking TransferFundsFromSavingsToCheckingAccount(customer.Id,10); Assert.AreEqual(85, ProxyFacade.SavingsAccountProxy().GetSavingsAccountBalance(customer.Id)); Assert.AreEqual(80, ProxyFacade.CheckingAccountProxy().GetCheckingAccountBalance(customer.Id));   // Transfer from Checking to Savings TransferFundsFromCheckingToSavingsAccount(customer.Id, 50); Assert.AreEqual(135, ProxyFacade.SavingsAccountProxy().GetSavingsAccountBalance(customer.Id)); Assert.AreEqual(30, ProxyFacade.CheckingAccountProxy().GetCheckingAccountBalance(customer.Id)); }   [Test] public void FundTransfersWithOverDraftTest() { IProfile profile = ProxyFacade.ProfileProxy(); string customerName = "Angelina" + DateTime.Now.ToString("HH:mm:ss");   var customerId = profile.CreateCustomer(customerName, "NJ", new DateTime(1972, 1, 1)).Id;   ProxyFacade.SavingsAccountProxy().DepositAmount(customerId, 100); TransferFundsFromSavingsToCheckingAccount(customerId,80); Assert.AreEqual(20, ProxyFacade.SavingsAccountProxy().GetSavingsAccountBalance(customerId)); Assert.AreEqual(80, ProxyFacade.CheckingAccountProxy().GetCheckingAccountBalance(customerId));   try { TransferFundsFromSavingsToCheckingAccount(customerId,30); } catch (Exception e) { Debug.WriteLine(e.Message); }   Assert.AreEqual(110, ProxyFacade.CheckingAccountProxy().GetCheckingAccountBalance(customerId)); Assert.AreEqual(20, ProxyFacade.SavingsAccountProxy().GetSavingsAccountBalance(customerId)); } } }   We are creating a new instance of the channel for every operation, we will look into instance management and how creating a new instance of channel affects it in subsequent articles. The first two test cases deals with creation of Customer, deposit and withdraw of month between accounts. The last case, FundTransferWithOverDraftTest() is interesting. Customer starts with depositing $100 in SavingsAccount followed by transfer of $80 in to checking account resulting in $20 in savings account.  Customer then initiates $30 transfer from Savings to Checking resulting in overdraft exception on Savings with $30 being deposited to Checking. As we are not running both the requests in transactions the customer ends up with more amount than what he started with $100. In subsequent posts we will look into transactions handling.  Make sure the ServiceHost project is set as start up project and start the solution. Run the test cases either from NUnit client or TestDriven.Net/Resharper which ever is your favorite tool. Make sure you have updated the data base connection string in the ServiceHost config file to point to your local database

    Read the article

  • April 14th Links: ASP.NET, ASP.NET MVC, ASP.NET Web API and Visual Studio

    - by ScottGu
    Here is the latest in my link-listing blog series: ASP.NET Easily overlooked features in VS 11 Express for Web: Good post by Scott Hanselman that highlights a bunch of easily overlooked improvements that are coming to VS 11 (and specifically the free express editions) for web development: unit testing, browser chooser/launcher, IIS Express, CSS Color Picker, Image Preview in Solution Explorer and more. Get Started with ASP.NET 4.5 Web Forms: Good 5-part tutorial that walks-through building an application using ASP.NET Web Forms and highlights some of the nice improvements coming with ASP.NET 4.5. What is New in Razor V2 and What Else is New in Razor V2: Great posts by Andrew Nurse, a dev on the ASP.NET team, about some of the new improvements coming with ASP.NET Razor v2. ASP.NET MVC 4 AllowAnonymous Attribute: Nice post from David Hayden that talks about the new [AllowAnonymous] filter introduced with ASP.NET MVC 4. Introduction to the ASP.NET Web API: Great tutorial by Stephen Walher that covers how to use the new ASP.NET Web API support built-into ASP.NET 4.5 and ASP.NET MVC 4. Comprehensive List of ASP.NET Web API Tutorials and Articles: Tugberk Ugurlu links to a huge collection of articles, tutorials, and samples about the new ASP.NET Web API capability. Async Mashups using ASP.NET Web API: Nice post by Henrik on how you can use the new async language support coming with .NET 4.5 to easily and efficiently make asynchronous network requests that do not block threads within ASP.NET. ASP.NET and Front-End Web Development Visual Studio 11 and Front End Web Development - JavaScript/HTML5/CSS3: Nice post by Scott Hanselman that highlights some of the great improvements coming with VS 11 (including the free express edition) for front-end web development. HTML5 Drag/Drop and Async Multi-file Upload with ASP.NET Web API: Great post by Filip W. that demonstrates how to implement an async file drag/drop uploader using HTML5 and ASP.NET Web API. Device Emulator Guide for Mobile Development with ASP.NET: Good post from Rachel Appel that covers how to use various device emulators with ASP.NET and VS to develop cross platform mobile sites. Fixing these jQuery: A Guide to Debugging: Great presentation by Adam Sontag on debugging with JavaScript and jQuery.  Some really good tips, tricks and gotchas that can save a lot of time. ASP.NET and Open Source Getting Started with ASP.NET Web Stack Source on CodePlex: Fantastic post by Henrik (an architect on the ASP.NET team) that provides step by step instructions on how to work with the ASP.NET source code we recently open sourced. Contributing to ASP.NET Web Stack Source on CodePlex: Follow-on to the post above (also by Henrik) that walks-through how you can submit a code contribution to the ASP.NET MVC, Web API and Razor projects. Overview of the WebApiContrib project: Nice post by Pedro Reys on the new open source WebApiContrib project that has been started to deliver cool extensions and libraries for use with ASP.NET Web API. Entity Framework Entity Framework 5 Performance Improvements and Performance Considerations for EF5:  Good articles that describes some of the big performance wins coming with EF5 (which will ship with both .NET 4.5 and ASP.NET MVC 4). Automatic compilation of LINQ queries will yield some significant performance wins (up to 600% faster). ASP.NET MVC 4 and EF Database Migrations: Good post by David Hayden that covers the new database migrations support within EF 4.3 which allows you to easily update your database schema during development - without losing any of the data within it. Visual Studio What's New in Visual Studio 11 Unit Testing: Nice post by Peter Provost (from the VS team) that talks about some of the great improvements coming to VS11 for unit testing - including built-in VS tooling support for a broad set of unit test frameworks (including NUnit, XUnit, Jasmine, QUnit and more) Hope this helps, Scott

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing DateTime – The Crazy Way

    - by João Angelo
    We all know that the process of unit testing code that depends on DateTime, particularly the current time provided through the static properties (Now, UtcNow and Today), it’s a PITA. If you go ask how to unit test DateTime.Now on stackoverflow I’ll bet that you’ll get two kind of answers: Encapsulate the current time in your own interface and use a standard mocking framework; Pull out the big guns like Typemock Isolator, JustMock or Microsoft Moles/Fakes and mock the static property directly. Now each alternative has is pros and cons and I would have to say that I glean more to the second approach because the first adds a layer of abstraction just for the sake of testability. However, the second approach depends on commercial tools that not every shop wants to buy or in the not so friendly Microsoft Moles. (Sidenote: Moles is now named Fakes and it will ship with VS 2012) This tends to leave people without an acceptable and simple solution so after reading another of these types of questions in SO I came up with yet another alternative, one based on the first alternative that I presented here but tries really hard to not get in your way with yet another layer of abstraction. So, without further dues, I present you, the Tardis. The Tardis is single section of conditionally compiled code that overrides the meaning of the DateTime expression inside a single class. You still get the normal coding experience of using DateTime all over the place, but in a DEBUG compilation your tests will be able to mock every static method or property of the DateTime class. An example follows, while the full Tardis code can be downloaded from GitHub: using System; using NSubstitute; using NUnit.Framework; using Tardis; public class Example { public Example() : this(string.Empty) { } public Example(string title) { #if DEBUG this.DateTime = DateTimeProvider.Default; this.Initialize(title); } internal IDateTimeProvider DateTime { get; set; } internal Example(string title, IDateTimeProvider provider) { this.DateTime = provider; #endif this.Initialize(title); } private void Initialize(string title) { this.Title = title; this.CreatedAt = DateTime.UtcNow; } private string title; public string Title { get { return this.title; } set { this.title = value; this.UpdatedAt = DateTime.UtcNow; } } public DateTime CreatedAt { get; private set; } public DateTime UpdatedAt { get; private set; } } public class TExample { public void T001() { // Arrange var tardis = Substitute.For<IDateTimeProvider>(); tardis.UtcNow.Returns(new DateTime(2000, 1, 1, 6, 6, 6)); // Act var sut = new Example("Title", tardis); // Assert Assert.That(sut.CreatedAt, Is.EqualTo(tardis.UtcNow)); } public void T002() { // Arrange var tardis = Substitute.For<IDateTimeProvider>(); var sut = new Example("Title", tardis); tardis.UtcNow.Returns(new DateTime(2000, 1, 1, 6, 6, 6)); // Act sut.Title = "Updated"; // Assert Assert.That(sut.UpdatedAt, Is.EqualTo(tardis.UtcNow)); } } This approach is also suitable for other similar classes with commonly used static methods or properties like the ConfigurationManager class.

    Read the article

  • What are some good questions (and good/bad answers) to ask at an interview to gauge the competency of the company/team?

    - by Wayne M
    I'm already familiar with the Joel Test, but it's been my experience that some of the questions there have the answers "massaged" to make the company seem better than it is. I've had several jobs in the past that, for instance, claimed they had a QA process and did unit testing, and what they really meant is "The programmers test the app, and test with the debugger and via trial-and-error."; they said they used SVN but they just lumped everything into one giant repository and had no concept of branching/merging or anything more complicated than updating and committing; said they can build in one step and what they really mean is it's "one step" to copy dozens of files by hand from the programmer's PC to the live server. How do you go about properly gauging a company's environment to make sure that it's a well-evolved company and not stuck on doing things a certain way because they've done it for years and they're ignorant of change? You can almost never ask to see their source code, so you're stuck trying to figure out if the interviewer's answer is accurate or BS to make the company seem good. Besides the Joel Test what are some other good questions to get the proper feel for a company, and more importantly what are some good and bad answers that could indicate a good or bad company? I mean something like (take at face value, please, it's all I could think of at short notice): Question: How does the software team apply the SOLID principles and Inversion of Control to their code? Good Answer: We adhere to SOLID wherever possible; we use TDD so it kind of forces us to write abstract, testable code. We use Ninject for our IoC container because it's fairly easy to configure - it was that or StructureMap but I find Ninject a bit more intuitive, and who doesn't like ninjas? You're not a pirate, are you? Bad Answer: Our code is pretty secure, yeah. And what's this Inversion of Control thing? I've never heard of it before. You see what I did there. The "good" answer uses facts to back it up and has a bit of "in crowd" humor; the bad answer shows complete ignorance of the question - not necessarily a bad thing if you are interviewing for a manger/director position, but a terrible answer and a huge red flag if you're interviewing as a developer and talking to a senior developer or manager! My biggest problem at the moment is being able to take a generic response and gauge whether it's the good or bad answer; more often than not it's the bad kind and I find myself frustrated almost from day one at the new job. I suppose I could name drop if I ask about specific things (e.g. "Do you write unit tests?" and if the answer is yes, ask if they use NUnit, MbUnit or something else; if they mention data access ask if they use a clean ORM like NHibernate or something more coupled like EF or Linq) but is there another way short of being resolute to actually call the interview on things (which will almost certainly result in not getting the job, but if they are skirting the question it's probably not a job I want).

    Read the article

  • Dependency injection: How to sell it

    - by Mel
    Let it be known that I am a big fan of dependency injection (DI) and automated testing. I could talk all day about it. Background Recently, our team just got this big project that is to built from scratch. It is a strategic application with complex business requirements. Of course, I wanted it to be nice and clean, which for me meant: maintainable and testable. So I wanted to use DI. Resistance The problem was in our team, DI is taboo. It has been brought up a few times, but the gods do not approve. But that did not discourage me. My Move This may sound weird but third-party libraries are usually not approved by our architect team (think: "thou shalt not speak of Unity, Ninject, NHibernate, Moq or NUnit, lest I cut your finger"). So instead of using an established DI container, I wrote an extremely simple container. It basically wired up all your dependencies on startup, injects any dependencies (constructor/property) and disposed any disposable objects at the end of the web request. It was extremely lightweight and just did what we needed. And then I asked them to review it. The Response Well, to make it short. I was met with heavy resistance. The main argument was, "We don't need to add this layer of complexity to an already complex project". Also, "It's not like we will be plugging in different implementations of components". And "We want to keep it simple, if possible just stuff everything into one assembly. DI is an uneeded complexity with no benefit". Finally, My Question How would you handle my situation? I am not good in presenting my ideas, and I would like to know how people would present their argument. Of course, I am assuming that like me, you prefer to use DI. If you don't agree, please do say why so I can see the other side of the coin. It would be really interesting to see the point of view of someone who disagrees. Update Thank you for everyone's answers. It really puts things into perspective. It's nice enough to have another set of eyes to give you feedback, fifteen is really awesome! This are really great answers and helped me see the issue from different sides, but I can only choose one answer, so I will just pick the top voted one. Thanks everyone for taking the time to answer. I have decided that it is probably not the best time to implement DI, and we are not ready for it. Instead, I will concentrate my efforts on making the design testable and attempt to present automated unit testing. I am aware that writing tests is additional overhead and if ever it is decided that the additional overhead is not worth it, personally I would still see it as a win situation since the design is still testable. And if ever testing or DI is a choice in future, the design can easily handle it.

    Read the article

  • Dependency Injection Introduction

    - by MarkPearl
    I recently was going over a great book called “Dependency Injection in .Net” by Mark Seeman. So far I have really enjoyed the book and would recommend anyone looking to get into DI to give it a read. Today I thought I would blog about the first example Mark gives in his book to illustrate some of the benefits that DI provides. The ones he lists are Late binding Extensibility Parallel Development Maintainability Testability To illustrate some of these benefits he gives a HelloWorld example using DI that illustrates some of the basic principles. It goes something like this… class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var writer = new ConsoleMessageWriter(); var salutation = new Salutation(writer); salutation.Exclaim(); Console.ReadLine(); } } public interface IMessageWriter { void Write(string message); } public class ConsoleMessageWriter : IMessageWriter { public void Write(string message) { Console.WriteLine(message); } } public class Salutation { private readonly IMessageWriter _writer; public Salutation(IMessageWriter writer) { _writer = writer; } public void Exclaim() { _writer.Write("Hello World"); } }   If you had asked me a few years ago if I had thought this was a good approach to solving the HelloWorld problem I would have resounded “No”. How could the above be better than the following…. class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { Console.WriteLine("Hello World"); Console.ReadLine(); } }  Today, my mind-set has changed because of the pain of past programs. So often we can look at a small snippet of code and make judgements when we need to keep in mind that we will most probably be implementing these patterns in projects with hundreds of thousands of lines of code and in projects that we have tests that we don’t want to break and that’s where the first solution outshines the latter. Let’s see if the first example achieves some of the outcomes that were listed as benefits of DI. Could I test the first solution easily? Yes… We could write something like the following using NUnit and RhinoMocks… [TestFixture] public class SalutationTests { [Test] public void ExclaimWillWriteCorrectMessageToMessageWriter() { var writerMock = MockRepository.GenerateMock<IMessageWriter>(); var sut = new Salutation(writerMock); sut.Exclaim(); writerMock.AssertWasCalled(x => x.Write("Hello World")); } }   This would test the existing code fine. Let’s say we then wanted to extend the original solution so that we had a secure message writer. We could write a class like the following… public class SecureMessageWriter : IMessageWriter { private readonly IMessageWriter _writer; private readonly string _secretPassword; public SecureMessageWriter(IMessageWriter writer, string secretPassword) { _writer = writer; _secretPassword = secretPassword; } public void Write(string message) { if (_secretPassword == "Mark") { _writer.Write(message); } else { _writer.Write("Unauthenticated"); } } }   And then extend our implementation of the program as follows… class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var writer = new SecureMessageWriter(new ConsoleMessageWriter(), "Mark"); var salutation = new Salutation(writer); salutation.Exclaim(); Console.ReadLine(); } }   Our application has now been successfully extended and yet we did very little code change. In addition, our existing tests did not break and we would just need add tests for the extended functionality. Would this approach allow parallel development? Well, I am in two camps on parallel development but with some planning ahead of time it would allow for it as you would simply need to decide on the interface signature and could then have teams develop different sections programming to that interface. So,this was really just a quick intro to some of the basic concepts of DI that Mark introduces very successfully in his book. I am hoping to blog about this further as I continue through the book to list some of the more complex implementations of containers.

    Read the article

  • Using NSpec at various architectural layers

    - by nono
    Having read the quick start at nspec.org, I realized that NSpec might be a useful tool in a scenario which was becoming a bit cumbersome with NUnit alone. I'm adding an OAuth (or, DotNetOpenAuth) to a website and quickly made a mess of writing test methods such as [Test] public void UserIsLoggedInLocallyPriorToInvokingExternalLoginAndExternalLoginSucceedsAndExternalProviderIdIsNotAlreadyAssociatedWithUserAccount() { ... } ... and I wound up with maybe a dozen permutations of this theme, for the user already being logged in locally and not locally, the external login succeeding or failing, etc. Not only were the method names unwieldy, but every test needed a setup that contained parts in common with a different set of other tests. I realized that NSpec's incremental setup capabilities would work great for this, and for a while I was trucking a long wonderfully, with code like act = () => { actionResult = controller.ExternalLoginCallback(returnUrl); }; context["The user is already logged in"] = () => { before = () => identity.Setup(x => x.IsAuthenticated).Returns(true); context["The external login succeeds"] = () => { before = () => oauth.Setup(x => x.VerifyAuthentication(It.IsAny<string>())).Returns(new AuthenticationResult(true, providerName, "provideruserid", "username", new Dictionary<string, string>())); context["External login already exists for current user"] = () => { before = () => authService.Setup(x => x.ExternalLoginExistsForUser(It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>())).Returns(true); it["Should add 'login sucessful' alert"] = () => { var alerts = (IList<Alert>)controller.TempData[TempDataKeys.AlertCollection]; alerts[0].Message.should_be_same("Login successful"); alerts[0].AlertType.should_be(AlertType.Success); }; it["Should return a redirect result"] = () => actionResult.should_cast_to<RedirectToRouteResult>(); }; context["External login already exists for another user"] = () => { before = () => authService.Setup(x => x.ExternalLoginExistsForAnyOtherUser(It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>())).Returns(true); it["Adds an error alert"] = () => { var alerts = (IList<Alert>)controller.TempData[TempDataKeys.AlertCollection]; alerts[0].Message.should_be_same("The external login you requested is already associated with a different user account"); alerts[0].AlertType.should_be(AlertType.Error); }; it["Should return a redirect result"] = () => actionResult.should_cast_to<RedirectToRouteResult>(); }; This approach seemed to work magnificently until I prepared to write test code for my ApplicationServices layer, to which I delegate viewmodel manipulation from my MVC controllers, and which coordinates the operations of the lower data repository layer: public void CreateUserAccountFromExternalLogin(RegisterExternalLoginModel model) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public void AssociateExternalLoginWithUser(string userName, string provider, string providerUserId) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public string GetLocalUserName(string provider, string providerUserId) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } I have no idea what in the world to name the test class, the test methods, or even if I should perhaps include the testing for this layer into the test class from my large code snippet above, so that a single feature or user action could be tested without regard to architectural layering. I can't find any tutorials or blog posts which cover more than simple examples, so I would appreciate any recommendations or pointing in the right direction. I would even welcome "your question is invalid"-type answers as long as some explanation is provided.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19  | Next Page >