Search Results

Search found 25386 results on 1016 pages for 'zend test'.

Page 165/1016 | < Previous Page | 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172  | Next Page >

  • Reproducing a Conversion Deadlock

    - by Alexander Kuznetsov
    Even if two processes compete on only one resource, they still can embrace in a deadlock. The following scripts reproduce such a scenario. In one tab, run this: CREATE TABLE dbo.Test ( i INT ) ; GO INSERT INTO dbo.Test ( i ) VALUES ( 1 ) ; GO SET TRANSACTION ISOLATION LEVEL SERIALIZABLE ; BEGIN TRAN SELECT i FROM dbo.Test ; --UPDATE dbo.Test SET i=2 ; After this script has completed, we have an outstanding transaction holding a shared lock. In another tab, let us have that another connection have...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Browser testing - Ideas on how to tackle it efficiently

    - by Rob
    Browser testing, the bane of any web designers life! Are there any tools and/or ways in which I can efficiently test different browsers on both Mac and PC? I not only want to test different browsers but also different versions of each browser. My current setup is on a Mac running VirtualBox with Windows Vista installed. This allows me to test both Mac and PC but the complications arise when trying to test different versions of browsers. Any one have any ideas?

    Read the article

  • At which architecture level are you running BDD tests (e.g. Cucumber)

    - by Pete
    I have in the last year gotten quite fond of using SpecFlow (which is a .NET port of Cucumber) I have used it both to test a ASP.NET MVC application at the web layer, i.e. using browser automation, but also at the controller layer. The first gives me a higher confidence in the correctness of the application, because JavaScript is tested, and improper controller configuration is also caught. But those tests are slower to execute, and more complex to implement, than those just testing on the controller layer. My tests are full functional tests, i.e. they exercise all layers of the application, all the way down to the database. So the first thing before any scenario is that the database is cleared of data, allowing the test to assume that only data specified in the "Given" block exists. Then I see example on how to use it, where they test just exercise the model layer. So what are your experiences with these tools? Which layer of the application do you test?

    Read the article

  • BizTalk 2009 - Error when Testing Map with Flat File Source Schema

    - by StuartBrierley
    I have recently been creating some flat file schemas using the BizTalk Server 2009 Flat File Schema Wizard.  I have then been mapping these flat file schemas to a "normal" xml schema format. I have not previsouly had any cause to map flat files and ran into some trouble when testing the first of these flat file maps; with an instance of the flat file as the source it threw an XSL transform error: Test Map.btm: error btm1050: XSL transform error: Unable to write output instance to the following <file:///C:\Documents and Settings\sbrierley\Local Settings\Temp\_MapData\Test Mapping\Test Map_output.xml>. Data at the root level is invalid. Line 1, position 1. Due to the complexity of the map in question I decided to created a small test map using the same source and destination schemas to see if I could pinpoint the problem.  Although the source message instance vaildated correctly against the flat file schema, when I then tested this simplified map I got the same error. After a time of fruitless head scratching and some serious google time I figured out what the problem was. Looking at the map properties I noticed that I had the test map input set to "XML" - for a flat file instance this should be set to "native".

    Read the article

  • Automated testing tool development challenges (for embedded software)

    - by Karthi prime
    My boss want to come up with the proposal for the following tool: An IDE: Able to build, compile, debug, via JTAG programming for the micro-controller. A Test Suite, reads the code in the IDE, auto generates the test cases, and it gives the in-target unit testing results(which is done by controlling code execution in the micro-controller via IDE). A no-overhead code coverage tool which interacts with the test suite and IDE. My work is to obtain the high level architecture of this tool, so as to proceed further. My current knowledge: There are tool-chains available from the chip manufacturer for the micro-controllers which can be utilized along with an open-source IDE like Eclipse, and along with an open-source burner, a complete IDE for a micro-controller can be done. Test cases can be auto-generated by reading the source file through the process of parsing, scripting, based on keywords. Test suite must be able to command the IDE to control, through breakpoints, and read the register contents from the microcontroller - This enables the in-target unit testing. An no-overhead code coverage should be done by no-overhead code instrumentation so as to execute those in the resource constraint environment of the micro-controller. I have the following questions: Any advice on the validity of my understanding? What are the challenges I will have during the development? What are the helpful open-source tools regarding this? What is the development time for this software? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Visual Studio 2010 Service Pack 1 Released

    - by krislankford
    The VS 2010 SP 1 release was simultaneous to the release of TFS 2010 SP1 and includes support for the Project Server Integration Feature Pack and updates to .NET Framework 4.0. The complete Visual Studio SP1 list including Test and Lab Manager: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/983509 The release addresses some of the most requested features from customers of Visual Studio 2010 like better help support IntelliTrace support for 64bit and SharePoint Silverlight 4 Tools in the box unit testing support on .NET 3.5 a new performance wizard for Silverlight Another major addition is the announcement of Unlimited Load Testing for Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate with MSDN Subscribers! The benefits of Visual Studio 2010 Load Test Feature Pack and useful links: Improved Overall Software Quality through Early Lifecycle Performance Testing: Lets you stress test your application early and throughout its development lifecycle with realistically modeled simulated load. By integrating performance validations early into your applications, you can ensure that your solution copes with real-world demands and behaves in a predictable manner, effectively increasing overall software quality. Higher Productivity and Reduced TCO with the Ability to Scale without Incremental Costs: Development teams no longer have to purchase Visual Studio Load Test Virtual User Pack 2010. Download the Visual Studio 2010 Load Test Feature Pack Deployment Guide Get started with stress and performance testing with Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate: Quality Solutions Best Practice: Enabling Performance and Stress Testing throughout the Application Lifecycle Hands-On-Lab: Introduction to Load Testing with ASP.NET Profile in Visual Studio 2010 How-Do-I videos: Use ASP.NET Profiler in Load Tests Use Network Emulation in Load Tests VHD/VPC walkthrough: Getting Started with Load and Performance Testing Best Practice guidance: Visual Studio Performance Testing Quick Reference Guide

    Read the article

  • Big level objects collision system for 2d game

    - by Aristarhys
    I read many variants today and get some knowledge in general, so here is a steps of mine thoughts in pictures (horrible paint.net ones). We need to develop grid system, so we check only thing near, perform simple check to cut out deep check, and at - last deep check like per-pixel collision check. Step 1 - Let p1, p2 are some sprites lets first just check with circle collision - because large distance between p1, p2 this fails and of course so we don't need test more deeply. But if we have not 2, but 20 objects, why we need to even circle test something so far outside of our view. Step 2 - Add basic column system, now we don't bother with p2 if it's in a column far from p1 column, so we even don't do circle test. But p3 is in the same col, so let do circle test, which of course will fail. Step 3 - Lets improve column system to the grid system with grid cell size just like p1, p2, p3 collision boxes, so we cut out things much top or below p1. And this is all great until comes BIG OBJs which is some kind of platforms. They are much bigger then grid cell. Circle test for will be successful, but deep check for whole big obj will fail And that the part I can't get. How do I store the grid position of big object? Like 4 grid coords for big object vertexes? And if one of them close to p1 do circle check for centre of big object then a deep one if succeed? Am I do it wrong? My possible solution:

    Read the article

  • More on Map Testing

    - by Michael Stephenson
    I have been chatting with Maurice den Heijer recently about his codeplex project for the BizTalk Map Testing Framework (http://mtf.codeplex.com/). Some of you may remember the article I did for BizTalk 2009 and 2006 about how to test maps but with Maurice's project he is effectively looking at how to improve productivity and quality by building some useful testing features within the framework to simplify the process of testing maps. As part of our discussion we realized that we both had slightly different approaches to how we validate the output from the map. Put simple Maurice does some xpath validation of the data in various nodes where as my approach for most standard cases is to use serialization to allow you to validate the output using normal MSTest assertions. I'm not really going to go into the pro's and con's of each approach because I think there is a place for both and also I'm sure others have various approaches which work too. What would be great is for the map testing framework to provide support for different ways of testing which can cover everything from simple cases to some very specialized scenarios. So as agreed with Maurice I have done the sample which I will talk about in the rest of this article to show how we can use the serialization approach to create and compare the input and output from a map in normal development testing. Prerequisites One of the common patterns I usually implement when developing BizTalk solutions is to use xsd.exe to create .net classes for most of the schemas used within the solution. In the testing pattern I will take advantage of these .net classes. The Map In this sample the map we will use is very simple and just concatenates some data from the input message to the output message. Hopefully the below picture illustrates this well. The Test In the test I'm basically taking the following actions: Use the .net class generated from the schema to create an input message for the map Serialize the input object to a file Run the map from .net using the standard BizTalk test method which was generated for running the map Deserialize the output file from the map execution to a .net class representing the output schema Use MsTest assertions to validate things about the output message The below picture shows this: As you can see the code for this is pretty simple and it's all strongly typed which means changes to my schema which can affect the tests can be easily picked up as compilation errors. I can then chose to have one test which validates most of the output from the map, or to have many specific tests covering individual scenarios within the map. Summary Hopefully this post illustrates a powerful yet simple way of effectively testing many BizTalk mapping scenarios. I will probably have more conversations with Maurice about these approaches and perhaps some of the above will be included in the mapping test framework.   The sample can be downloaded from here: http://cid-983a58358c675769.office.live.com/self.aspx/Blog%20Samples/More%20Map%20Testing/MapTestSample.zip

    Read the article

  • OpenJDK 6 B26 Available

    - by user9158633
    On September 21, 2012 the source bundle for OpenJDK 6 b26 was published at http://download.java.net/openjdk/jdk6/. The main changes in b26 are the latest round of security updates and a number of other fixes. For more information see the detailed list of all the changes in OpenJDK 6 B26. Test Results: All the jdk regression tests run with  make test passed on linux. cd jdk6 make make test For the current list of excluded tests see  jdk6/jdk/test/ProblemList.txt file:  ProblemList.html in B26 |  Latest ProblemList.txt (in the tip revision). Special thanks to Kelly O'Hair for his contributions to the project and Dave Katleman for his Release Engineering work.

    Read the article

  • Is static universally "evil" for unit testing and if so why does resharper recommend it?

    - by Vaccano
    I have found that there are only 3 ways to unit test (mock/stub) dependencies that are static in C#.NET: Moles TypeMock JustMock Given that two of these are not free and one has not hit release 1.0, mocking static stuff is not too easy. Does that make static methods and such "evil" (in the unit testing sense)? And if so, why does resharper want me to make anything that can be static, static? (Assuming resharper is not also "evil".) Clarification: I am talking about the scenario when you want to unit test a method and that method calls a static method in a different unit/class. By most definitions of unit testing, if you just let the method under test call the static method in the other unit/class then you are not unit testing, you are integration testing. (Useful, but not a unit test.)

    Read the article

  • root folder php scripts not running in nginx

    - by Thermionix
    nginx with php-fpm on ubuntu 12.04 server. attempting to access /var/www/test.php (via https://example.net/test.php) downloads the script instead of executing it. if I place the test.php in a subdirectory, i.e. /var/www/test/test.php it executes. root.conf; root /var/www; include php-fpm.conf; location ~ /\. { access_log off; log_not_found off; deny all; } php-fpm.conf; location ~ \.php$ { try_files $uri =404; fastcgi_pass unix:/var/run/php5-fpm.socket; include fastcgi_params; } fastcgi_params; fastcgi_param QUERY_STRING $query_string; fastcgi_param REQUEST_METHOD $request_method; fastcgi_param CONTENT_TYPE $content_type; fastcgi_param CONTENT_LENGTH $content_length; fastcgi_index index.php; fastcgi_param HTTPS on; fastcgi_param SCRIPT_FILENAME $document_root$fastcgi_script_name; #fastcgi_param SCRIPT_FILENAME $request_filename; fastcgi_param SCRIPT_NAME $fastcgi_script_name; fastcgi_param REQUEST_URI $request_uri; fastcgi_param DOCUMENT_URI $document_uri; fastcgi_param DOCUMENT_ROOT $document_root; fastcgi_param SERVER_PROTOCOL $server_protocol; fastcgi_param GATEWAY_INTERFACE CGI/1.1; fastcgi_param SERVER_SOFTWARE nginx/$nginx_version; fastcgi_param REMOTE_ADDR $remote_addr; fastcgi_param REMOTE_PORT $remote_port; fastcgi_param SERVER_ADDR $server_addr; fastcgi_param SERVER_PORT $server_port; fastcgi_param SERVER_NAME $server_name; # PHP only, required if PHP was built with --enable-force-cgi-redirect fastcgi_param REDIRECT_STATUS 200;

    Read the article

  • Debian Wheezy, hostapd running but no AP detected by clients

    - by f0o
    I've an TL-WN951N (AR5416+AR5008) using ath9k module running an hostapd and a dhcp for it. So hostapd starts fine: $ hostapd wifi.test Configuration file: wifi.test Using interface int1 with hwaddr f4:ec:38:9b:d4:93 and ssid 'test' hostapd.conf: interface=int1 driver=nl80211 ssid=test channel=1 But nobody seems to find it or being able to see it or connect to it by setting BSSID to 'test'. I'm quite frustrated now, I find 'howto' after 'howto' from people with same chipsets and it always seemed to work out great for them - but not here... iw list even shows up the AP mode being present at the interface... Thanks for your help

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Unit Testing with tSQLt

    When one considers the amount of time and effort that Unit Testing consumes for the Database Developer, is surprising how few good SQL Server Test frameworks are around. tSQLt , which is open source and free to use, is one of the frameworks that provide a simple way to populate a table with test data as part of the unit test, and check the results with what should be expected. Sebastian Meine and Dennis Lloyd, who created tSQLt, explain

    Read the article

  • Scanning php uploads in tmp directory with clamdscan fails

    - by Nikola
    I can't seem to get this thing to work, some permission problem maybe, but i can't even run clamdscan normally form console with root the result is always Permission denied. for example i create a file test.txt (eicar file) in /tmp and execute "clandscan /tmp/test.txt" in console logged in as root and i get "/tmp/test.txt: Access denied. ERROR ". The clamd demon is running with user clamav could that be the reason? Now i want to scan the same file (/tmp/test.txt) via php , so i run (i have chowned the file to apache:apache ) $cmd="clamdscan /tmp/test.txt"; exec($cmd,$a,$b); i get error 127 i try with the full path of the command /usr/bin/clamdscan i get error 126 (command is found but is not executable), this means that apache doesn't have the permission to execute /usr/bin/clamdscan ? what could be the problem?

    Read the article

  • Powershell: Get-Framework-Versions.

    - by marc dekeyser
    This function will use the test-key function posted earlier. It will check which .NET frameworks are installed (currently only checking for .NET 4.0) but can be easily adapted and/or expanded. function Get-Framework-Versions(){    $installedFrameworks = @()    if(Test-Key "HKLM:\Software\Microsoft\NET Framework Setup\NDP\v4\Client" "Install") { $installedFrameworks += "4.0c" }    if(Test-Key "HKLM:\Software\Microsoft\NET Framework Setup\NDP\v4\Full" "Install") { $installedFrameworks += "4.0" }            return $installedFrameworks}

    Read the article

  • Testing what is happening inside your BizTalk solution

    - by Michael Stephenson
    As BizTalk developers we all know that one of the common challenges is how to test your BizTalk solution once it is deployed to BizTalk. Hopefully most of us are using the BizUnit framework for testing, but we still have the limitation that it's a very Black Box test. I have put together a sample and video to show a technique where I'm using the Logging Framework from the BizTalk CAT Team at Microsoft and where by BizUnit test is able to make assertions against the instrumentation going through the framework. This means that I can test for things happening such as the fact a component was executed or which branch of an orchestration was executed by simply using my normal instrumented code. I've put the sample and video for this on the following codeplex site: http://btsloggingeventsinbi.codeplex.com/ The video should also be on cloud casts fairly soon too.

    Read the article

  • RasterizerState set to null after calling DrawText in Nuclex

    - by ProgrammerAtWork
    I have the following code in XNA: // class members Text t1; Text t2; Text t3; // init // Debugfont is size 24 vectorfont t1 = MM.DebugFont24.Fill("hello"); t1 = MM.DebugFont24.Extrude("hello"); t2 = MM.DebugFont24.Fill("hello"); t2 = MM.DebugFont24.Extrude("hello"); t3 = MM.DebugFont24.Fill("hello"); t3 = MM.DebugFont24.Extrude("hello"); // Draw TextBatch test = new TextBatch(MM.GD); test.DrawText(t1, Color.Red); test.DrawText(t2, Color.Red); test.DrawText(t3, Color.Red); test.End(); //After the second call to the TextBatch, RasterizerState of the GraphicsDevice is set to null //But I don't get any runtime errors or any indication of that something is wrong. Is this supposed to happen? Or am I doing something wrong? I've discovered that this happened because culling was set to None when I was rendering textures

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Unit Testing with tSQLt

    When one considers the amount of time and effort that Unit Testing consumes for the Database Developer, is surprising how few good SQL Server Test frameworks are around. tSQLt , which is open source and free to use, is one of the frameworks that provide a simple way to populate a table with test data as part of the unit test, and check the results with what should be expected. Sebastian and Dennis, who created tSQLt, explain.

    Read the article

  • Opengl + SDL linking error

    - by me2loveit2
    I am trying to load an image as a texture with opengl using c++ in visual studio 2010. I researched a couple hours online and found the SDL library, then I implemented a simple example and got some linking error I can not seem to figure out. The error log is here: 1Build started 10/20/2012 12:09:17 AM. 1InitializeBuildStatus: 1 Touching "Debug\texture mapping test.unsuccessfulbuild". 1ClCompile: 1 All outputs are up-to-date. 1 texture mapping test.cpp 1ManifestResourceCompile: 1 All outputs are up-to-date. 1texture mapping test.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol _IMG_Load referenced in function "void __cdecl display(void)" (?display@@YAXXZ) 1MSVCRTD.lib(crtexe.obj) : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol main referenced in function __tmainCRTStartup 1C:\Users\Me\Documents\Visual Studio 2010\Projects\Programming projects\texture mapping test\Debug\texture mapping test.exe : fatal error LNK1120: 2 unresolved externals 1 1Build FAILED. 1 1Time Elapsed 00:00:02.45 ========== Build: 0 succeeded, 1 failed, 0 up-to-date, 0 skipped ========== Can someone please help me!! I am at a desperate point right now. I downloaded the SDL, and copied all the .h file into: C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft SDKs\Windows\v7.0A\Include I added the .lib (x86) files into://as a not i tried the (x64) file too but got the exact same error C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft SDKs\Windows\v7.0A\Lib and the .dll(x86) into: C:\Windows\System32 For implementing textures, I used the simple sample code from: http://www.sdltutorials.com/sdl-tip-sdl-surface-to-opengl-texture Please let me know if you can see me doing something wrong, or know how I can fix this!! Thanks Phil

    Read the article

  • Adding a new automatic number sequence

    - by Paul
    We write test case documents. In these documents, each test case is numbered. E.g. Foobar-UI-1 to Foobar-UI-23 or Foobar-Device-1 to Foobar-Device-87 I'd like to autonumber these. I don't think I want just a new numbered list format, I want something like the list of figures - where figures (or test case) can be defined anywhere in the doc with other headings and paragraphs between them, and I can insert a "List of figures" table at the beginning. So how do I do "test cases" and a "list of test-cases" table in the same way as figures work out of the box?

    Read the article

  • Making WatiN Wait for JQuery document.Ready() Functions to Complete

    - by Steve Wilkes
    WatiN's DomContainer.WaitForComplete() method pauses test execution until the DOM has finished loading, but if your page has functions registered with JQuery's ready() function, you'll probably want to wait for those to finish executing before testing it. Here's a WatiN extension method which pauses test execution until that happens. JQuery (as far as I can see) doesn't provide an event or other way of being notified of when it's finished running your ready() functions, so you have to get around it another way. Luckily, because ready() executes the functions it's given in the order they're registered, you can simply register another one to add a 'marker' div to the page, and tell WatiN to wait for that div to exist. Here's the code; I added the extension method to Browser rather than DomContainer (Browser derives from DomContainer) because it's the sort of thing you only execute once for each of the pages your test loads, so Browser seemed like a good place to put it. public static void WaitForJQueryDocumentReadyFunctionsToComplete(this Browser browser) { // Don't try this is JQuery isn't defined on the page: if (bool.Parse(browser.Eval("typeof $ == 'function'"))) { const string jqueryCompleteId = "jquery-document-ready-functions-complete"; // Register a ready() function which adds a marker div to the body: browser.Eval( @"$(document).ready(function() { " + "$('body').append('<div id=""" + jqueryCompleteId + @""" />'); " + "});"); // Wait for the marker div to exist or make the test fail: browser.Div(Find.ById(jqueryCompleteId)) .WaitUntilExistsOrFail(10, "JQuery document ready functions did not complete."); } } The code uses the Eval() method to send JavaScript to the browser to be executed; first to check that JQuery actually exists on the page, then to add the new ready() method. WaitUntilExistsOrFail() is another WatiN extension method I've written (I've ended up writing really quite a lot of them) which waits for the element on which it is invoked to exist, and uses Assert.Fail() to fail the test with the given message if it doesn't exist within the specified number of seconds. Here it is: public static void WaitUntilExistsOrFail(this Element element, int timeoutInSeconds, string failureMessage) { try { element.WaitUntilExists(timeoutInSeconds); } catch (WatinTimeoutException) { Assert.Fail(failureMessage); } }

    Read the article

  • Exchange 2010 Autodiscover/OAB update issue

    - by bulldog5046
    Mid way through migration from 2003 to 2010 and with a few test users on 2010 i've noticed that the OAB is not being downloaded to outlook clients. I've checked the URL's are configured, addded both our CAS servers to the web based distribution list for the OAB and assigned the OAB to 2 mailbox databases we use but when i use outlook 'Test E-Mail AutoConfiguration' test i still see that the autodiscover says "OAB URL: Public Folder" even though i've now deselected the option. I've ran Test-OutlookWebServices to which i was getting an OAB error about no URL in the autodiscovery but having just re-ran it now appears fine, yey the autoconfigure test still does not. Does anyone have any idea why i'm getting this discrepency?

    Read the article

  • What is the most appropriate testing method in this scenario?

    - by Daniel Bruce
    I'm writing some Objective-C apps (for OS X/iOS) and I'm currently implementing a service to be shared across them. The service is intended to be fairly self-contained. For the current functionality I'm envisioning there will be only one method that clients will call to do a fairly complicated series of steps both using private methods on the class, and passing data through a bunch of "data mangling classes" to arrive at an end result. The gist of the code is to fetch a log of changes, stored in a service-internal data store, that has occurred since a particular time, simplify the log to only include the last applicable change for each object, attach the serialized values for the affected objects and return this all to the client. My question then is, how do I unit-test this entry point method? Obviously, each class would have thorough unit tests to ensure that their functionality works as expected, but the entry point seems harder to "disconnect" from the rest of the world. I would rather not send in each of these internal classes IoC-style, because they're small and are only made classes to satisfy the single-responsibility principle. I see a couple possibilities: Create a "private" interface header for the tests with methods that call the internal classes and test each of these methods separately. Then, to test the entry point, make a partial mock of the service class with these private methods mocked out and just test that the methods are called with the right arguments. Write a series of fatter tests for the entry point without mocking out anything, testing the entire functionality in one go. This looks, to me, more like "integration testing" and seems brittle, but it does satisfy the "only test via the public interface" principle. Write a factory that returns these internal services and take that in the initializer, then write a factory that returns mocked versions of them to use in tests. This has the downside of making the construction of the service annoying, and leaks internal details to the client. Write a "private" initializer that take these services as extra parameters, use that to provide mocked services, and have the public initializer back-end to this one. This would ensure that the client code still sees the easy/pretty initializer and no internals are leaked. I'm sure there's more ways to solve this problem that I haven't thought of yet, but my question is: what's the most appropriate approach according to unit testing best practices? Especially considering I would prefer to write this test-first, meaning I should preferably only create these services as the code indicates a need for them.

    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 | 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172  | Next Page >