Search Results

Search found 2240 results on 90 pages for 'assert redirected to'.

Page 16/90 | < Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >

• C function changes behaviour depending on whether it has a call to printf in it

  - by Daniel

  I have a function that processes some data and finds the threshold that classifies the data with the lowest error. It looks like this: void find_threshold(FeatureVal* fvals, sampledata* data, unsigned int num_samples, double* thresh, double* err, int* pol) { //code to calculate minThresh, minErr, minPol omitted printf("minThresh: %f, minErr: %f, minPol: %d\n", minThresh, minErr, minPol); *thresh = minThresh; *err = minErr; *pol = minPol; } Then in my test file I have this: void test_find_threshold() { //code to set up test data omitted find_threshold(fvals, sdata, 6, &thresh, &err, &pol); printf("Expected 5 got %f\n", thresh); assert(eq(thresh, 5.0)); printf("Expected 1 got %d\n", pol); assert(pol == 1); printf("Expected 0 got %f\n", err); assert(eq(err, 0.0)); } This runs and the test passes with the following output: minThresh: 5.000000, minErr: 0.000000, minPol: 1 Expected 5 got 5.000000 Expected 1 got 1 Expected 0 got 0.000000 However if I remove the call to printf() from find_threshold, suddenly the test fails! Commenting out the asserts so that I can see what gets returned, the output is: Expected 5 got -15.000000 Expected 1 got -1 Expected 0 got 0.333333 I cannot make any sense of this whatsoever.

  Read the article

• How to TDD Asynchronous Events?

  - by Padu Merloti

  The fundamental question is how do I create a unit test that needs to call a method, wait for an event to happen on the tested class and then call another method (the one that we actually want to test)? Here's the scenario if you have time to read further: I'm developing an application that has to control a piece of hardware. In order to avoid dependency from hardware availability, when I create my object I specify that we are running in test mode. When that happens, the class that is being tested creates the appropriate driver hierarchy (in this case a thin mock layer of hardware drivers). Imagine that the class in question is an Elevator and I want to test the method that gives me the floor number that the elevator is. Here is how my fictitious test looks like right now: [TestMethod] public void TestGetCurrentFloor() { var elevator = new Elevator(Elevator.Environment.Offline); elevator.ElevatorArrivedOnFloor += TestElevatorArrived; elevator.GoToFloor(5); //Here's where I'm getting lost... I could block //until TestElevatorArrived gives me a signal, but //I'm not sure it's the best way int floor = elevator.GetCurrentFloor(); Assert.AreEqual(floor, 5); } Edit: Thanks for all the answers. This is how I ended up implementing it: [TestMethod] public void TestGetCurrentFloor() { var elevator = new Elevator(Elevator.Environment.Offline); elevator.ElevatorArrivedOnFloor += (s, e) => { Monitor.Pulse(this); }; lock (this) { elevator.GoToFloor(5); if (!Monitor.Wait(this, Timeout)) Assert.Fail("Elevator did not reach destination in time"); int floor = elevator.GetCurrentFloor(); Assert.AreEqual(floor, 5); } }

  Read the article

• How do I properly implement a property in F#?

  - by Greg D

  Consider my first attempt, a simple type in F# like the following: type Test() = inherit BaseImplementingNotifyPropertyChangedViaOnPropertyChanged() let mutable prop: string = null member this.Prop with public get() = prop and public set value = match value with | _ when value = prop -> () | _ -> let prop = value this.OnPropertyChanged("Prop") Now I test this via C# (this object is being exposed to a C# project, so apparent C# semantics are desirable): [TestMethod] public void TaskMaster_Test() { var target = new FTest(); string propName = null; target.PropertyChanged += (s, a) => propName = a.PropertyName; target.Prop = "newString"; Assert.AreEqual("Prop", propName); Assert.AreEqual("newString", target.Prop); return; } propName is properly assigned, my F# Setter is running, but the second assert is failing because the underlying value of prop isn't changed. This sort of makes sense to me, because if I remove mutable from the prop field, no error is generated (and one should be because I'm trying to mutate the value). I think I must be missing a fundamental concept. What's the correct way to rebind/mutate prop in the Test class so that I can pass my unit test?

  Read the article

• What header file is where the boost libray define its own primitive data type?

  - by ronghai

  Recently, I try to use the boost::spirit::qi binary endian parser to parse some binary data depends on the endianness of the Platform. There is a simple example, like following: Using declarations and variables: using boost::spirit::qi::little_word; using boost::spirit::qi::little_dword; using boost::spirit::qi::little_qword; boost::uint16_t us; boost::uint32_t ui; boost::uint64_t ul; Basic usage of the little endian binary parsers: test_parser_attr("\x01\x02", little_word, us); assert(us == 0x0201); test_parser_attr("\x01\x02\x03\x04", little_dword, ui); assert(ui == 0x04030201); test_parser_attr("\x01\x02\x03\x04\x05\x06\x07\x08", little_qword, ul); assert(ul == 0x0807060504030201LL); test_parser("\x01\x02", little_word(0x0201)); test_parser("\x01\x02\x03\x04", little_dword(0x04030201)); test_parser("\x01\x02\x03\x04\x05\x06\x07\x08", little_qword(0x0807060504030201LL)); It works very well. But my questions come, why do we need use some data types like boost::uint16_t, boost::uint32_t here? Can I use unsigned long or unsigned int here? And if I want to parse double or float data type, what boost data type should I use? And please tell me where is boost define the above these types? Thanks a lot.

  Read the article

• Weird .net 4.0 exception when running unit tests

  - by vdh_ant

  Hi guys I am receiving the following exception when trying to run my unit tests using .net 4.0 under VS2010 with moq 3.1. Attempt by security transparent method 'SPPD.Backend.DataAccess.Test.Specs_for_Core.When_using_base.Can_create_mapper()' to access security critical method 'Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting.Assert.IsNotNull(System.Object)' failed. Assembly 'SPPD.Backend.DataAccess.Test, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null' is marked with the AllowPartiallyTrustedCallersAttribute, and uses the level 2 security transparency model. Level 2 transparency causes all methods in AllowPartiallyTrustedCallers assemblies to become security transparent by default, which may be the cause of this exception. The test I am running is really straight forward and looks something like the following: [TestMethod] public void Can_create_mapper() { this.SetupTest(); var mockMapper = new Moq.Mock<IMapper>().Object; this._Resolver.Setup(x => x.Resolve<IMapper>()).Returns(mockMapper).Verifiable(); var testBaseDa = new TestBaseDa(); var result = testBaseDa.TestCreateMapper<IMapper>(); Assert.IsNotNull(result); //<<< THROWS EXCEPTION HERE Assert.AreSame(mockMapper, result); this._Resolver.Verify(); } I have no idea what this means and I have been looking around and have found very little on the topic. The closest reference I have found is this http://dotnetzip.codeplex.com/Thread/View.aspx?ThreadId=80274 but its not very clear on what they did to fix it... Anyone got any ideas?

  Read the article

• Calculate an Internet (aka IP, aka RFC791) checksum in C#

  - by Pat

  Interestingly, I can find implementations for the Internet Checksum in almost every language except C#. Does anyone have an implementation to share? Remember, the internet protocol specifies that: "The checksum field is the 16 bit one's complement of the one's complement sum of all 16 bit words in the header. For purposes of computing the checksum, the value of the checksum field is zero." More explanation can be found from Dr. Math. There are some efficiency pointers available, but that's not really a large concern for me at this point. Please include your tests! (Edit: Valid comment regarding testing someone else's code - but I am going off of the protocol and don't have test vectors of my own and would rather unit test it than put into production to see if it matches what is currently being used! ;-) Edit: Here are some unit tests that I came up with. They test an extension method which iterates through the entire byte collection. Please comment if you find fault in the tests. [TestMethod()] public void InternetChecksum_SimplestValidValue_ShouldMatch() { IEnumerable<byte> value = new byte[1]; // should work for any-length array of zeros ushort expected = 0xFFFF; ushort actual = value.InternetChecksum(); Assert.AreEqual(expected, actual); } [TestMethod()] public void InternetChecksum_ValidSingleByteExtreme_ShouldMatch() { IEnumerable<byte> value = new byte[]{0xFF}; ushort expected = 0xFF; ushort actual = value.InternetChecksum(); Assert.AreEqual(expected, actual); } [TestMethod()] public void InternetChecksum_ValidMultiByteExtrema_ShouldMatch() { IEnumerable<byte> value = new byte[] { 0x00, 0xFF }; ushort expected = 0xFF00; ushort actual = value.InternetChecksum(); Assert.AreEqual(expected, actual); }

  Read the article

• Float addition promoted to double?

  - by Andreas Brinck

  I had a small WTF moment this morning. Ths WTF can be summarized with this: float x = 0.2f; float y = 0.1f; float z = x + y; assert(z == x + y); //This assert is triggered! (Atleast with visual studio 2008) The reason seems to be that the expression x + y is promoted to double and compared with the truncated version in z. (If i change z to double the assert isn't triggered). I can see that for precision reasons it would make sense to perform all floating point arithmetics in double precision before converting the result to single precision. I found the following paragraph in the standard (which I guess I sort of already knew, but not in this context): 4.6.1. "An rvalue of type float can be converted to an rvalue of type double. The value is unchanged" My question is, is x + y guaranteed to be promoted to double or is at the compiler's discretion? UPDATE: Since many people has claimed that one shouldn't use == for floating point, I just wanted to state that in the specific case I'm working with, an exact comparison is justified. Floating point comparision is tricky, here's an interesting link on the subject which I think hasn't been mentioned.

  Read the article

• How to manage sessions in NHibernate unit tests?

  - by Ben

  I am a little unsure as to how to manage sessions within my nunit test fixtures. In the following test fixture, I am testing a repository. My repository constructor takes in an ISession (since I will be using session per request in my web application). In my test fixture setup I configure NHibernate and build the session factory. In my test setup I create a clean SQLite database for each test executed. [TestFixture] public class SimpleRepository_Fixture { private static ISessionFactory _sessionFactory; private static Configuration _configuration; [TestFixtureSetUp] // called before any tests in fixture are executed public void TestFixtureSetUp() { _configuration = new Configuration(); _configuration.Configure(); _configuration.AddAssembly(typeof(SimpleObject).Assembly); _sessionFactory = _configuration.BuildSessionFactory(); } [SetUp] // called before each test method is called public void SetupContext() { new SchemaExport(_configuration).Execute(true, true, false); } [Test] public void Can_add_new_simpleobject() { var simpleObject = new SimpleObject() { Name = "Object 1" }; using (var session = _sessionFactory.OpenSession()) { var repo = new SimpleObjectRepository(session); repo.Save(simpleObject); } using (var session =_sessionFactory.OpenSession()) { var repo = new SimpleObjectRepository(session); var fromDb = repo.GetById(simpleObject.Id); Assert.IsNotNull(fromDb); Assert.AreNotSame(simpleObject, fromDb); Assert.AreEqual(simpleObject.Name, fromDb.Name); } } } Is this a good approach or should I be handling the sessions differently? Thanks Ben

  Read the article

• How do I change the base class at runtime in C#?

  - by MatthewMartin

  I may be working on mission impossible here, but I seem to be getting close. I want to extend a ASP.NET control, and I want my code to be unit testable. Also, I'd like to be able to fake behaviors of a real Label (namely things like ID generation, etc), which a real Label can't do in an nUnit host. Here a working example that makes assertions on something that depends on a real base class and something that doesn't-- in a more realistic unit test, the test would depend on both --i.e. an ID existing and some custom behavior. Anyhow the code says it better than I can: public class LabelWrapper : Label //Runtime //public class LabelWrapper : FakeLabel //Unit Test time { private readonly LabelLogic logic= new LabelLogic(); public override string Text { get { return logic.ProcessGetText(base.Text); } set { base.Text=logic.ProcessSetText(value); } } } //Ugh, now I have to test FakeLabelWrapper public class FakeLabelWrapper : FakeLabel //Unit Test time { private readonly LabelLogic logic= new LabelLogic(); public override string Text { get { return logic.ProcessGetText(base.Text); } set { base.Text=logic.ProcessSetText(value); } } } [TestFixture] public class UnitTest { [Test] public void Test() { //Wish this was LabelWrapper label = new LabelWrapper(new FakeBase()) LabelWrapper label = new LabelWrapper(); //FakeLabelWrapper label = new FakeLabelWrapper(); label.Text = "ToUpper"; Assert.AreEqual("TOUPPER",label.Text); StringWriter stringWriter = new StringWriter(); HtmlTextWriter writer = new HtmlTextWriter(stringWriter); label.RenderControl(writer); Assert.AreEqual(1,label.ID); Assert.AreEqual("<span>TOUPPER</span>", stringWriter.ToString()); } } public class FakeLabel { virtual public string Text { get; set; } public void RenderControl(TextWriter writer) { writer.Write("<span>" + Text + "</span>"); } } //System Under Test internal class LabelLogic { internal string ProcessGetText(string value) { return value.ToUpper(); } internal string ProcessSetText(string value) { return value.ToUpper(); } }

  Read the article

• How to correctly waitFor() a saveScreenShot() end of execution.

  - by Alain

  Here is my full first working test: var expect = require('chai').expect; var assert = require('assert'); var webdriverjs = require('webdriverjs'); var client = {}; var webdriverOptions = { desiredCapabilities: { browserName: 'phantomjs' }, logLevel: 'verbose' }; describe('Test mysite', function(){ before(function() { client = webdriverjs.remote( webdriverOptions ); client.init(); }); var selector = "#mybodybody"; it('should see the correct title', function(done) { client.url('http://localhost/mysite/') .getTitle( function(err, title){ expect(err).to.be.null; assert.strictEqual(title, 'My title page' ); }) .waitFor( selector, 2000, function(){ client.saveScreenshot( "./ExtractScreen.png" ); }) .waitFor( selector, 7000, function(){ }) .call(done); }); after(function(done) { client.end(done); }); }); Ok, it does not do much, but after working many hours to get the environement correctly setup, it passed. Now, the only way I got it working is by playing with the waitFor() method and adjust the delays. It works, but I still do not understand how to surely wait for a png file to be saved on disk. As I will deal with tests orders, I will eventually get hung up from the test script before securely save the file. Now, How can I improve this screen save sequence and avoid loosing my screenshot ? Thanks.

  Read the article

• ArrayList.Sort should be a stable sort with an IComparer but is not?

  - by Kaleb Pederson

  A stable sort is a sort that maintains the relative ordering of elements with the same value. The docs on ArrayList.Sort say that when an IComparer is provided the sort is stable: If comparer is set to null, this method performs a comparison sort (also called an unstable sort); that is, if two elements are equal, their order might not be preserved. In contrast, a stable sort preserves the order of elements that are equal. To perform a stable sort, you must implement a custom IComparer interface. Unless I'm missing something, the following testcase shows that ArrayList.Sort is not using a stable sort: internal class DisplayOrdered { public int ID { get; set; } public int DisplayOrder { get; set; } public override string ToString() { return string.Format("ID: {0}, DisplayOrder: {1}", ID, DisplayOrder); } } internal class DisplayOrderedComparer : IComparer { public int Compare(object x, object y) { return ((DisplayOrdered)x).DisplayOrder - ((DisplayOrdered)y).DisplayOrder; } } [TestFixture] public class ArrayListStableSortTest { [Test] public void TestWeblinkCallArrayListIsSortedUsingStableSort() { var call1 = new DisplayOrdered {ID = 1, DisplayOrder = 0}; var call2 = new DisplayOrdered {ID = 2, DisplayOrder = 0}; var call3 = new DisplayOrdered {ID = 3, DisplayOrder = 2}; var list = new ArrayList {call1, call2, call3}; list.Sort(new DisplayOrderedComparer()); // expected order (by ID): 1, 2, 3 (because the DisplayOrder // is equal for ID's 1 and 2, their ordering should be // maintained for a stable sort.) Assert.AreEqual(call1, list[0]); // Actual: ID=2 ** FAILS Assert.AreEqual(call2, list[1]); // Actual: ID=1 Assert.AreEqual(call3, list[2]); // Actual: ID=3 } } Am I missing something? If not, would this be a documentation bug or a library bug? Apparently using an OrderBy in Linq gives a stable sort.

  Read the article

• How can I write a unit test to determine whether an object can be garbage collected?

  - by driis

  In relation to my previous question, I need to check whether a component that will be instantiated by Castle Windsor, can be garbage collected after my code has finished using it. I have tried the suggestion in the answers from the previous question, but it does not seem to work as expected, at least for my code. So I would like to write a unit test that tests whether a specific object instance can be garbage collected after some of my code has run. Is that possible to do in a reliable way ? EDIT I currently have the following test based on Paul Stovell's answer, which succeeds: [TestMethod] public void ReleaseTest() { WindsorContainer container = new WindsorContainer(); container.Kernel.ReleasePolicy = new NoTrackingReleasePolicy(); container.AddComponentWithLifestyle<ReleaseTester>(LifestyleType.Transient); Assert.AreEqual(0, ReleaseTester.refCount); var weakRef = new WeakReference(container.Resolve<ReleaseTester>()); Assert.AreEqual(1, ReleaseTester.refCount); GC.Collect(); GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers(); Assert.AreEqual(0, ReleaseTester.refCount, "Component not released"); } private class ReleaseTester { public static int refCount = 0; public ReleaseTester() { refCount++; } ~ReleaseTester() { refCount--; } } Am I right assuming that, based on the test above, I can conclude that Windsor will not leak memory when using the NoTrackingReleasePolicy ?

  Read the article

• How do I use .htaccess to redirect to a URL containing HTTP_HOST?

  - by Jon Cram

  Problem I need to redirect some short convenience URLs to longer actual URLs. The site in question uses a set of subdomains to identify a set of development or live versions. I would like the URL to which certain requests are redirected to include the HTTP_HOST such that I don't have to create a custom .htaccess file for each host. Host-specific Example (snipped from .htaccess file) Redirect /terms http://support.dev01.example.com/articles/terms/ This example works fine for the development version running at dev01.example.com. If I use the same line in the main .htaccess file for the development version running under dev02.example.com I'd end up being redirected to the wrong place. Ideal rule (not sure of the correct syntax) Redirect /terms http://support.{HTTP_HOST}/articles/terms/ This rule does not work and merely serves as an example of what I'd like to achieve. I could then use the exact same rule under many different hosts and get the correct result. Answers? Can this be done with mod_alias or does it require the more complex mod_rewrite? How can this be achieved using mod_alias or mod_rewrite? I'd prefer a mod_alias solution if possible. Clarifications I'm not staying on the same server. I'd like: http://example.com/terms/ - http://support.example.com/articles/terms/ https://secure.example.com/terms/ - http://support.example.com/articles/terms/ http://dev.example.com/terms/ - http://support.dev.example.com/articles/terms/ https://secure.dev.example.com/terms/ - http://support.dev.example.com/articles/terms/ I'd like to be able to use the same rule in the .htaccess file on both example.com and dev.example.com. In this situation I'd need to be able to refer to the HTTP_HOST as a variable rather than specifying it literally in the URL to which requests are redirected. I'll investigate the HTTP_HOST parameter as suggested but was hoping for a working example.

  Read the article

• GUI Agent accepts statuses from Daemon and shows it using progress indicator

  - by Pavel

  Hi to all! My application is a GUI agent, which communicate with daemon through the unix domain socket, wrapped in CFSocket.... So there are main loop and added CFRunLoop source. Daemon sends statuses and agent shows it with a progress indicator. When there are any data on socket, callback function begin to work and at this time I have to immediately show the new window with progress indicator and increase counter. //this function initiate the runloop for listening socket - (int) AcceptDaemonConnection:(ConnectionRef)conn { int err = 0; conn->fSockCF = CFSocketCreateWithNative(NULL, (CFSocketNativeHandle) conn->fSockFD, kCFSocketAcceptCallBack, ConnectionGotData, NULL); if (conn->fSockCF == NULL) err = EINVAL; if (err == 0) { conn->fRunLoopSource = CFSocketCreateRunLoopSource(NULL, conn->fSockCF, 0); if (conn->fRunLoopSource == NULL) err = EINVAL; else CFRunLoopAddSource(CFRunLoopGetCurrent(), conn->fRunLoopSource, kCFRunLoopDefaultMode); CFRelease(conn->fRunLoopSource); } return err; } // callback function void ConnectionGotData(CFSocketRef s, CFSocketCallBackType type, CFDataRef address, const void * data, void * info) { #pragma unused(s) #pragma unused(address) #pragma unused(info) assert(type == kCFSocketAcceptCallBack); assert( (int *) data != NULL ); assert( (*(int *) data) != -1 ); TStatusUpdate status; int nativeSocket = *(int *) data; status = [agg AcceptPacket:nativeSocket]; // [stWindow InitNewWindow] inside [agg SendUpdateStatus:status.percent]; } AcceptPacket function receives packet from the socket and trying to show new window with progress indicator. Corresponding function is called, but nothing happens... I think, that I have to make work the main application loop with interrupting CFSocket loop... Or send a notification? No idea....

  Read the article

• Best way to unit test Collection?

  - by limc

  I'm just wondering how folks unit test and assert that the "expected" collection is the same/similar as the "actual" collection (order is not important). To perform this assertion, I wrote my simple assert API:- public void assertCollection(Collection<?> expectedCollection, Collection<?> actualCollection) { assertNotNull(expectedCollection); assertNotNull(actualCollection); assertEquals(expectedCollection.size(), actualCollection.size()); assertTrue(expectedCollection.containsAll(actualCollection)); assertTrue(actualCollection.containsAll(expectedCollection)); } Well, it works. It's pretty simple if I'm asserting just bunch of Integers or Strings. It can also be pretty painful if I'm trying to assert a collection of Hibernate domains, say for example. The collection.containsAll(..) relies on the equals(..) to perform the check, but I always override the equals(..) in my Hibernate domains to check only the business keys (which is the best practice stated in the Hibernate website) and not all the fields of that domain. Sure, it makes sense to check just against the business keys, but there are times I really want to make sure all the fields are correct, not just the business keys (for example, new data entry record). So, in this case, I can't mess around with the domain.equals(..) and it almost seems like I need to implement some comparators for just unit testing purposes instead of relying on collection.containsAll(..). Are there some testing libraries I could leverage here? How do you test your collection? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Why does this asp.net mvc unit test fail?

  - by Brian McCord

  I have this unit test: [TestMethod] public void Delete_Post_Passes_With_State_4() { //Arrange ViewResult result = stateController.Delete( 4 ) as ViewResult; var model = (State)result.ViewData.Model; //Act RedirectToRouteResult redirectResult = stateController.Delete( model ) as RedirectToRouteResult; var newresult = stateController.Delete( 4 ) as ViewResult; var newmodel = (State)newresult.ViewData.Model; //Assert Assert.AreEqual( redirectResult.RouteValues["action"], "Index" ); Assert.IsNull( newmodel ); } Here are the two controller actions that handle deleting: // // GET: /State/Delete/5 public ActionResult Delete(int id) { var x = _stateService.GetById( id ); return View(x); } // // POST: /State/Delete/5 [HttpPost] public ActionResult Delete(State model) { try { if( model == null ) { return View( model ); } _stateService.Delete( model ); return RedirectToAction("Index"); } catch { return View( model ); } } What I can't figure out is why this test fails. I have verified that the record actually gets deleted from the list. If I set a break point in the Delete method on the line: var x = _stateService.GetById( id ); The GetById does indeed return a null just as it should, but when it gets back to the newresult variable in the test, the ViewData.Model is the deleted model. What am I doing wrong?

  Read the article

• ASP.NET MVC Unit Testing Controllers - Repositories

  - by Brian McCord

  This is more of an opinion seeking question, so there may not be a "right" answer, but I would welcome arguments as to why your answer is the "right" one. Given an MVC application that is using Entity Framework for the persistence engine, a repository layer, a service layer that basically defers to the repository, and a delete method on a controller that looks like this: public ActionResult Delete(State model) { try { if( model == null ) { return View( model ); } _stateService.Delete( model ); return RedirectToAction("Index"); } catch { return View( model ); } } I am looking for the proper way to Unit Test this. Currently, I have a fake repository that gets used in the service, and my unit test looks like this: [TestMethod] public void Delete_Post_Passes_With_State_4() { //Arrange var stateService = GetService(); var stateController = new StateController( stateService ); ViewResult result = stateController.Delete( 4 ) as ViewResult; var model = (State)result.ViewData.Model; //Act RedirectToRouteResult redirectResult = stateController.Delete( model ) as RedirectToRouteResult; stateController = new StateController( stateService ); var newresult = stateController.Delete( 4 ) as ViewResult; var newmodel = (State)newresult.ViewData.Model; //Assert Assert.AreEqual( redirectResult.RouteValues["action"], "Index" ); Assert.IsNull( newmodel ); } Is this overkill? Do I need to check to see if the record actually got deleted (as I already have Service and Repository tests that verify this)? Should I even use a fake repository here or would it make more sense just to mock the whole thing? The examples I'm looking at used this model of doing things, and I just copied it, but I'm really open to doing things in a "best practices" way. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Rails log shows unexpected data as to the time spent on a DB stuff

  - by Arhimed

  I'm running on WinXP + Ruby 1.8.6 + Rails 2.3.5 (frozen to the project) in development environment. Looking at development.log I observe inconsistent data as to the time spent on a database stuff. Example #1 (good): Processing PagesController#index (for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-05-11 12:15:54) [GET] Parameters: {"action"=>"index", "controller"=>"pages"} City Columns (563.0ms) SHOW FIELDS FROM `cities` City Load (15.0ms) SELECT * FROM `cities` WHERE (`cities`.`short_name` = 'NY') LIMIT 1 Redirected to http://xyz:3000/sightings Completed in 953ms (DB: 578) | 302 Found [http://xyz/] Example #2 (unexpected): Processing PagesController#index (for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-05-11 12:15:36) [GET] Parameters: {"action"=>"index", "controller"=>"pages"} City Columns (0.0ms) SHOW FIELDS FROM `cities` City Load (0.0ms) SELECT * FROM `cities` WHERE (`cities`.`short_name` = 'NY') LIMIT 1 Redirected to http://xyz:3000/sightings Completed in 47ms (DB: 32) | 302 Found [http://xyz/] Example #2 shows 32ms were spent on DB while there were just 2 sql querries and both of zero time spent. Example #3 (unexpected): Processing PagesController#index (for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-05-11 11:21:24) [GET] Parameters: {"action"=>"index", "controller"=>"pages"} City Columns (63.0ms) SHOW FIELDS FROM `cities` City Load (62.0ms) SELECT * FROM `cities` WHERE (`cities`.`short_name` = 'NY') LIMIT 1 Redirected to http://xyz:3000/sightings Completed in 1187ms (DB: 297) | 302 Found [http://xyz/] Example #3 shows 297ms while there were querries of 63ms and 62ms (125ms in total). Can't understand it. Could someone explain? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• C# - Bug in Code Logic

  - by Matthew

  I have some code which keeps track of the number of times a button has been clicked. As a matter of fact, when the page first loads, a counter is set to 0. On every postback, the counter is incremented by 1. I have only one button on the page. The main idea behind this is to allow the user to enter some details 4 times. If he enters invalid details for 4 times, he is redirected to an error page. Otherwise, he is redirected to a confirmation page. This is my code: if (!this.IsPostBack) { Session["Count"] = 0; } else { if (Session["Count"] == null) { Session.Abandon(); Response.Redirect("CheckOutErrorPage.htm"); } else { int count = (int)Session["Count"]; if (count == 3) { Session.Abandon(); Response.Redirect("CheckOutFailure.aspx"); } else { count++; Session["Count"] = count; } } } Everything works as it should except that if the user enter invalid details for 3 times and then he enters VALID details on the 4th time, the user is redirected to the Error Page (because he has tried 4 times) instead of the confirmation page. How can I solve this please?

  Read the article

• Does waitpid yield valid status information for a child process that has already exited?

  - by dtrebbien

  If I fork a child process, and the child process exits before the parent even calls waitpid, then is the exit status information that is set by waitpid still valid? If so, when does it become not valid; i.e., how do I ensure that I can call waitpid on the child pid and continue to get valid exit status information after an arbitrary amount of time, and how do I "clean up" (tell the OS that I am no longer interested in the exit status information for the finished child process)? I was playing around with the following code, and it appears that the exit status information is valid for at least a few seconds after the child finishes, but I do not know for how long or how to inform the OS that I won't be calling waitpid again: #include <assert.h> #include <pthread.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <sys/wait.h> int main() { pid_t pid = fork(); if (pid < 0) { fprintf(stderr, "Failed to fork\n"); return EXIT_FAILURE; } else if (pid == 0) { // code for child process _exit(17); } else { // code for parent sleep(3); int status; waitpid(pid, &status, 0); waitpid(pid, &status, 0); // call `waitpid` again just to see if the first call had an effect assert(WIFEXITED(status)); assert(WEXITSTATUS(status) == 17); } return EXIT_SUCCESS; }

  Read the article

• Four-color theorem in Prolog (using a dynamic predicate)

  - by outa

  Hi, I'm working on coloring a map according to the four-color theorem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_color_theorem) with SWI-Prolog. So far my program looks like this: colour(red). colour(blue). map_color(A,B,C) :- colour(A), colour(B), colour(C), C \= B, C \= A. (the actual progam would be more complex, with 4 colors and more fields, but I thought I'd start out with a simple case) Now, I want to avoid double solutions that have the same structure. E.g. for a map with three fields, the solution "red, red, blue" would have the same structure as "blue, blue, red", just with different color names, and I don't want both of them displayed. So I thought I would have a dynamic predicate solution/3, and call assert(solution(A,B,C)) at the end of my map_color predicate. And then, for each solution, check if they already exist as a solution/3 fact. The problem is that I would have to assert something like solution(Color1,Color1,Color2), i.e. with variables in order to make a unification check. And I can't think of a way to achieve this. So, the question is, what is the best way to assert a found solution and then make a unification test so that "red, red, blue" would unify with "blue, blue, red"?

  Read the article

• How do I prevent qFatal() from aborting the application?

  - by Dave

  My Qt application uses Q_ASSERT_X, which calls qFatal(), which (by default) aborts the application. That's great for the application, but I'd like to suppress that behavior when unit testing the application. (I'm using the Google Test Framework.) I have by unit tests in a separate project, statically linking to the class I'm testing. The documentation for qFatal() reads: Calls the message handler with the fatal message msg. If no message handler has been installed, the message is printed to stderr. Under Windows, the message is sent to the debugger. If you are using the default message handler this function will abort on Unix systems to create a core dump. On Windows, for debug builds, this function will report a _CRT_ERROR enabling you to connect a debugger to the application. ... To supress the output at runtime, install your own message handler with qInstallMsgHandler(). So here's my main.cpp file: #include <gtest/gtest.h> #include <QApplication> void testMessageOutput(QtMsgType type, const char *msg) { switch (type) { case QtDebugMsg: fprintf(stderr, "Debug: %s\n", msg); break; case QtWarningMsg: fprintf(stderr, "Warning: %s\n", msg); break; case QtCriticalMsg: fprintf(stderr, "Critical: %s\n", msg); break; case QtFatalMsg: fprintf(stderr, "My Fatal: %s\n", msg); break; } } int main(int argc, char **argv) { qInstallMsgHandler(testMessageOutput); testing::InitGoogleTest(&argc, argv); return RUN_ALL_TESTS(); } But my application is still stopping at the assert. I can tell that my custom handler is being called, because the output when running my tests is: My Fatal: ASSERT failure in MyClass::doSomething: "doSomething()", file myclass.cpp, line 21 The program has unexpectedly finished. What can I do so that my tests keep running even when an assert fails?

  Read the article

• Lightcore IoC is returning the same instance when it should give a new one

  - by Anthony

  I have the following code using the lightcore IoC container. But it fails with "NUnit.Framework.AssertionException: Contained objects are equal" which indicates that the objects that should be transient, are not. Is this a bug in lightcore, or am I doing it wrong? [Test] public void JellybeanDispenserHasNewInstanceEachTimeWithDefault() { var builder = new ContainerBuilder(); builder.Register<IJellybeanDispenser, VanillaJellybeanDispenser>(); builder.Register<SweetVendingMachine>().ControlledBy<TransientLifecycle>(); builder.Register<SweetShop>(); builder.DefaultControlledBy<TransientLifecycle>(); IContainer container = builder.Build(); SweetShop sweetShop = container.Resolve<SweetShop>(); SweetShop sweetShop2 = container.Resolve<SweetShop>(); Assert.IsFalse(ReferenceEquals(sweetShop, sweetShop2), "Root objects are equal"); Assert.IsFalse(ReferenceEquals(sweetShop.SweetVendingMachine, sweetShop2.SweetVendingMachine), "Contained objects are equal"); Assert.IsFalse(ReferenceEquals(sweetShop.SweetVendingMachine.JellybeanDispenser, sweetShop2.SweetVendingMachine.JellybeanDispenser), "services are equal"); } PS: I would tag this question with "lightcore", but suddenly my reputation isn't good enough to make a new tag. Huh.

  Read the article

• Why does this ActionFilterAttribute not import data to the ViewModel?

  - by Tomas Lycken

  I have the following attribute public class ImportStatusAttribute : ActionFilterAttribute { public override void OnActionExecuted(ActionExecutedContext filterContext) { var model = (IHasStatus)filterContext.Controller.ViewData.Model; model.Status = (StatusMessageViewModel)filterContext.Controller.TempData["status"]; filterContext.Controller.ViewData.Model = model; } } which I test with the following test method (the first of several I'll write when this one passes...) [TestMethod] public void OnActionExecuted_ImportsStatusFromTempDataToModel() { // Arrange Expect(new { Status = new StatusMessageViewModel() { Subject = "The test", Predicate = "has been tested" }, Key = "status" }); var filterContext = new Mock<ActionExecutedContext>(); var model = new Mock<IHasStatus>(); var tempData = new TempDataDictionary(); var viewData = new ViewDataDictionary(model.Object); var controller = new FakeController() { ViewData = viewData, TempData = tempData }; tempData.Add(expected.Key, expected.Status); filterContext.Setup(c => c.Controller).Returns(controller); var attribute = new ImportStatusAttribute(); // Act attribute.OnActionExecuted(filterContext.Object); // Assert Assert.IsNotNull(model.Object.Status, "The status was not exported"); Assert.AreEqual(model.Object.Status.ToString(), ((StatusMessageViewModel)expected.Status).ToString(), "The status was not the expected"); } (Expect() is a method that saves some expectations in the expected object...) When I run the test, it fails on the first assertion, and I can't get my head around why. Debugging, I can see that model is populated correctly, and that (StatusMessageViewModel)filterContext.Controller.TempData["status"] has the correct data. But after model.Status = (StatusMessageViewModel)filterContext.Controller.TempData["status"]; model.Status is still null in my watch window. Why can't I do this?

  Read the article

• Images in IFRAME no longer showing after I log out of Flickr?

  - by contact-kram

  I have a iframe window which displays user's flickr images. I use the flickr.photos.search api to download the user's image from flickr. This works great when the user is logged into flickr. But when I explicitly log off the user from flickr and the yahoo network and then attempt to download the flickr images, I get redirected to www.yahoo.com in a full browser window (not in my iframe). If I remember correctly, I did not have this issue when I was not using iframes and I was being redirected to the yahoo login screen. Any suggestions? To elaborate, this URI - http://www.flickr.com/services/api/auth.howto.web.html, lists the below step - Create an auth handler When users follow your login url, they are directed to a page on flickr.com which asks them if they want to authorize your application. This page displays your application title and description along with the logo, if you uploaded one. When the user accepts the request, they are sent back to the Callback URL you defined in step 2. The URL will have a frob parameter added to it. For example, if your Callback URL was http://test.com/auth.php then the user might be redirected to http://test.com/auth.php?frob=185-837403740 (The frob value in this example is '185-837403740'). This does not happen when I am in my iframe window but it does happen in my full browser window.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >