Search Results

Search found 13653 results on 547 pages for 'integration testing'.

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

Page 152/547 | < Previous Page | 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • python mock patch : a method of instance is called?

    - by JuanPablo
    In python 2.7, I have this function from slacker import Slacker def post_message(token, channel, message): channel = '#{}'.format(channel) slack = Slacker(token) slack.chat.post_message(channel, message) with mock and patch, I can check that the token is used in Slacker class import unittest from mock import patch from slacker_cli import post_message class TestMessage(unittest.TestCase): @patch('slacker_cli.Slacker') def test_post_message_use_token(self, mock_slacker): token = 'aaa' channel = 'channel_name' message = 'message string' post_message(token, channel, message) mock_slacker.assert_called_with(token) how I can check the string use in post_message ? I try with mock_slacker.chat.post_message.assert_called_with('#channel') but I get AssertionError: Expected call: post_message('#channel') Not called

    Read the article

  • Execute JavaScript from within a C# assembly

    - by ScottKoon
    I'd like to execute JavaScript code from within a C# assembly and have the results of the JavaScript code returned to the calling C# code. It's easier to define things that I'm not trying to do: I'm not trying to call a JavaScript function on a web page from my code behind. I'm not trying to load a WebBrowser control. I don't want to have the JavaScript perform an AJAX call to a server. What I want to do is write unit tests in JavaScript and have then unit tests output JSON, even plain text would be fine. Then I want to have a generic C# class/executible that can load the file containing the JS, run the JS unit tests, scrap/load the results, and return a pass/fail with details during a post-build task. I think it's possible using the old ActiveX ScriptControl, but it seems like there ought to be a .NET way to do this without using SilverLight, the DLR, or anything else that hasn't shipped yet. Anyone have any ideas? update: From Brad Abrams blog namespace Microsoft.JScript.Vsa { [Obsolete("There is no replacement for this feature. Please see the ICodeCompiler documentation for additional help. http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=14202")] Clarification: We have unit tests for our JavaScript functions that are written in JavaScript using the JSUnit framework. Right now during our build process, we have to manually load a web page and click a button to ensure that all of the JavaScript unit tests pass. I'd like to be able to execute the tests during the post-build process when our automated C# unit tests are run and report the success/failure alongside of out C# unit tests and use them as an indicator as to whether or not the build is broken.

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • 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

  • 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

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

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

    Read the article

  • Can I write a test without any assert in it ?

    - by stratwine
    Hi, I'd like to know if it is "ok" to write a test without any "assert" in it. So the test would fail only when an exception / error has occured. Eg: like a test which has a simple select query, to ensure that the database configuration is right. So when I change some db-configuration, I re-run this test and check if the configuration is right. ? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Rails + RSpec problem

    - by FancyDancy
    I have just installed Rspec and Rspec-rails. When i try to run the test, it says: rake aborted! Command /opt/local/bin/ruby -I"lib" "/opt/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/bin/spec" "spec/controllers/free_controller_spec.rb" --options "/Volumes/Trash/dev/app/trunk/spec/spec.opts" failed Full log here: http://pastie.org/939211 However, my second "test" application with sqlite works with it. I think the problem is in my DB. My ruby version is 1.8.7, i use mysql as database. My files: specs/spec_helper.rb config/environment.rb config/environments/test.rb List of my gems My test is just: require 'spec_helper' describe FreeController do it "should respond with success" do get 'index' response.should be_success end end I really can't understand the error, so i don't know how to fix it.. Additional question: should i use a fixtures and ActiveRecord, if i going to use Machinist for creating test data? What should i do to disable them?

    Read the article

  • How to configure .NET test assembly to use website web.config?

    - by Morten Christiansen
    I've run into a problem setting up Selenium tests for an ASP.NET MVC project in cases where I need the settings provided in the web.config of the site under test. The problem is that I want to create a dummy user before running the test and this causes an error saying that the password-answer supplied is invalid. This is due to the test assembly not using the web.config, instead using default values for membership configuration. I've tried to copy the relevant section (membership configuration) into the app.config of the assembly without luck, but I admit I'm just grasping at straws here.

    Read the article

  • Dependency injection in C++

    - by Yorgos Pagles
    This is also a question that I asked in a comment in one of Miško Hevery's google talks that was dealing with dependency injection but it got buried in the comments. I wonder how can the factory / builder step of wiring the dependencies together can work in C++. I.e. we have a class A that depends on B. The builder will allocate B in the heap, pass a pointer to B in A's constructor while also allocating in the heap and return a pointer to A. Who cleans up afterwards? Is it good to let the builder clean up after it's done? It seems to be the correct method since in the talk it says that the builder should setup objects that are expected to have the same lifetime or at least the dependencies have longer lifetime (I also have a question on that). What I mean in code: class builder { public: builder() : m_ClassA(NULL),m_ClassB(NULL) { } ~builder() { if (m_ClassB) { delete m_ClassB; } if (m_ClassA) { delete m_ClassA; } } ClassA *build() { m_ClassB = new class B; m_ClassA = new class A(m_ClassB); return m_ClassA; } }; Now if there is a dependency that is expected to last longer than the lifetime of the object we are injecting it into (say ClassC is that dependency) I understand that we should change the build method to something like: ClassA *builder::build(ClassC *classC) { m_ClassB = new class B; m_ClassA = new class A(m_ClassB, classC); return m_ClassA; } What is your preferred approach?

    Read the article

  • Preconfigure Android Emulator with location?

    - by Janusz
    I want to run automated tests with location on the android emulator. I can setup coordinates via Telnet, but that means starting up a console and manually configuring the emulator before running my junit tests. Is there a possibility to preconfigure the emulator with a KML file or something like that to ensure that there are always coordinates available?

    Read the article

  • JSunit usability

    - by stevebot
    Is JSunit really a direct port of Junit to Javascript? So I have heard, but I am wondering why my company is not using it. My company has lots of smart minds, so If we are not using it I wonder if there are any major issues with Jsunit as a javascript test harness. Input would be much appreciated. thanks!

    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

  • 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

  • Is there a way to extract the message from a JavaScript dialog in Chrome?

    - by Samuel
    I’ve been working on an extension for automating tests in Chrome, and I came across an obscure issue with JavaScript dialogs. The message shown in the dialog can’t be readily retrieved/copied. I’ve used the GetWindowText and InternalGetWindowText functions, but they only return the title of the dialog and the text from the buttons, not the actual message itself. I even looked at programs that extract text from forms, but no luck. So does anyone know of a way to retrieve the text from these JavaScript dialogs in Chrome?

    Read the article

  • How to prevent swallowing exceptions caused by unset expectations for a mocked object?

    - by Schultz9999
    I am looking for a way to modify catch block depending on if it's executed during the unit test run or not. The purpose is basically to detect/setup mock expectations which are swallowed because catch doesn't rethrow. I am using MSTest. One obvious thing is using preprocessor but I don't think it works. Especially if to use DEBUG define. There should be an easy way to detect that, shouldn't it? I must have been looking for something wrong because I couldn't find much info on that. try {...} catch(Exception) { Log(...); #if DEBUG throw; #endif }

    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

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

< Previous Page | 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159  | Next Page >