Search Results

Search found 25284 results on 1012 pages for 'test driven'.

Page 19/1012 | < Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >

  • Install Quartz.Net as a windows service and Test installation

    - by Tarun Arora
    In this blog post I’ll be covering, 01: Where to download Quartz.net from 02: How to install Quartz.net as a Windows service 03: Test the Quartz.net Installation If you are new to Quartz.net I would recommend reading the blog post on a brief introduction to Quartz.net. 01 – Where to download Quartz.net? http://sourceforge.net/projects/quartznet/files/quartznet/       Currently version  Quartz.Net 2.0.1 is the recommended download version. 02 – How to install Quartz.net as a Windows service         Go to the download location and unzip the Quartz.net package Navigate to the folder Quartz.Net \ Server \ bin – This is where you will find different .net version installers of the quartz.net packages. For example in the screen shot above, you can see the Quartz.net .net 3.5 and .net 4 packages. Open up the Quartz.net .net 4.0 folder, this folder contains the files you need to install Quartz.net as a windows service Copy the contents of the folder Downloads\Quartz.NET-2.0.1\server\bin\4.0 to the folder %program files%\Quartz.net   5. Open up a new CMD as an administrator and run the below command to install Quartz.net as a windows service /> Quartz.Server.exe install 6. How do I know that Quartz.Net service has installed as a Windows service? Go to run prompt and type ‘services.msc’ you should now see all the windows services installed on your machine. Navigate down to look for Quartz.Net. The service installs itself as an automatic startup Type and log on as ‘Local System’. You can easily change this to your prefer account that you would like to run the service as. If you wanted to name the Quartz service something else then that’s also possible… Can I change the default display name of the quartz.net windows service? Yes, you can! Navigate to C:\Program Files (x86)\Quartz.Net\ and open up the config file ‘quartz.config’ - You can change the instance name - You can change the default thread count of 10 - The port that the service listens to (by default this is port 555) A blog post on more configuration details can be found here. 03 – Test Quartz.Net windows service installation So, I have installed Quartz.Net as a windows service, how do I test whether my installation has been successful. Open up cmd as an administrator and run the below command, C:\Program Files (x86)\Quartz.Net> Quartz.Server.exe –i Since by default the Quartz.net windows service writes INFO level diagnostics (this can be changed from Quartz.Server.exe.config) you should see the service information show up on the console. For instance in the example above I can see that the service is running in a NON CLUSTERED mode, its currently not started and is currently in standby mode with 0 number of jobs executed so far… This was second in the series of posts on enterprise scheduling using Quartz.net, in the next post I’ll be covering how to run your first scheduled task using Quartz.net windows service. Thank you for taking the time out and reading this blog post. If you enjoyed the post, remember to subscribe to http://feeds.feedburner.com/TarunArora. Stay tuned!

    Read the article

  • Are DDD Aggregates really a good idea in a Web Application?

    - by Mystere Man
    I'm diving in to Domain Driven Design and some of the concepts i'm coming across make a lot of sense on the surface, but when I think about them more I have to wonder if that's really a good idea. The concept of Aggregates, for instance makes sense. You create small domains of ownership so that you don't have to deal with the entire domain model. However, when I think about this in the context of a web app, we're frequently hitting the database to pull back small subsets of data. For instance, a page may only list the number of orders, with links to click on to open the order and see its order id's. If i'm understanding Aggregates right, I would typically use the repository pattern to return an OrderAggregate that would contain the members GetAll, GetByID, Delete, and Save. Ok, that sounds good. But... If I call GetAll to list all my order's, it would seem to me that this pattern would require the entire list of aggregate information to be returned, complete orders, order lines, etc... When I only need a small subset of that information (just header information). Am I missing something? Or is there some level of optimization you would use here? I can't imagine that anyone would advocate returning entire aggregates of information when you don't need it. Certainly, one could create methods on your repository like GetOrderHeaders, but that seems to defeat the purpose of using a pattern like repository in the first place. Can anyone clarify this for me?

    Read the article

  • Keeping a domain model consistent with actual data

    - by fstuijt
    Recently domain driven design got my attention, and while thinking about how this approach could help us I came across the following problem. In DDD the common approach is to retrieve entities (or better, aggregate roots) from a repository which acts as a in-memory collection of these entities. After these entities have been retrieved, they can be updated or deleted by the user, however after retrieval they are essentially disconnected from the data source and one must actively inform the repository to update the data source and make is consistent again with our in-memory representation. What is the DDD approach to retrieving entities that should remain connected to the data source? For example, in our situation we retrieve a series of sensors that have a specific measurement during retrieval. Over time, these measurement values may change and our business logic in the domain model should respond to these changes properly. E.g., domain events may be raised if a sensor value exceeds a predefined threshold. However, using the repository approach, these sensor values are just snapshots, and are disconnected from the data source. Does any of you have an idea on how to solve this following the DDD approach?

    Read the article

  • Repository query conditions, dependencies and DRY

    - by vFragosop
    To keep it simple, let's suppose an application which has Accounts and Users. Each account may have any number of users. There's also 3 consumers of UserRepository: An admin interface which may list all users Public front-end which may list all users An account authenticated API which should only list it's own users Assuming UserRepository is something like this: class UsersRepository extends DatabaseAbstraction { private function query() { return $this->database()->select('users.*'); } public function getAll() { return $this->query()->exec(); } // IMPORTANT: // Tons of other methods for searching, filtering, // joining of other tables, ordering and such... } Keeping in mind the comment above, and the necessity to abstract user querying conditions, How should I handle querying of users filtering by account_id? I can picture three possible roads: 1. Should I create an AccountUsersRepository? class AccountUsersRepository extends UserRepository { public function __construct(Account $account) { $this->account = $account; } private function query() { return parent::query() ->where('account_id', '=', $this->account->id); } } This has the advantage of reducing the duplication of UsersRepository methods, but doesn't quite fit into anything I've read about DDD so far (I'm rookie by the way) 2. Should I put it as a method on AccountsRepository? class AccountsRepository extends DatabaseAbstraction { public function getAccountUsers(Account $account) { return $this->database() ->select('users.*') ->where('account_id', '=', $account->id) ->exec(); } } This requires the duplication of all UserRepository methods and may need another UserQuery layer, that implements those querying logic on chainable way. 3. Should I query UserRepository from within my account entity? class Account extends Entity { public function getUsers() { return UserRepository::findByAccountId($this->id); } } This feels more like an aggregate root for me, but introduces dependency of UserRepository on Account entity, which may violate a few principles. 4. Or am I missing the point completely? Maybe there's an even better solution? Footnotes: Besides permissions being a Service concern, in my understanding, they shouldn't implement SQL query but leave that to repositories since those may not even be SQL driven.

    Read the article

  • Rescue overdue offshore projects and convince management to use automated tests

    - by oazabir
    I have published two articles on codeproject recently. One is a story where an offshore project was two months overdue, my friend who runs it was paying the team from his own pocket and he was drowning in ever increasing number of change requests and how we brainstormed together to come out of that situation. Tips and Tricks to rescue overdue projects Next one is about convincing management to go for automated test and give developers extra time per sprint, at the cost of reduced productivity for couple of sprints. It’s hard to negotiate this with even dev leads, let alone managers. Whenever you tell them - there’s going to be less features/bug fixes delivered for next 3 or 4 sprints because we want to automate the tests and reduce manual QA effort; everyone gets furious and kicks you out of the meeting. Especially in a startup where every sprint is jam packed with new features and priority bug fixes to satisfy various stakeholders, including the VCs, it’s very hard to communicate the benefits of automated tests across the board. Let me tell you of a story of one of my startups where I had the pleasure to argue on this and came out victorious. How to convince developers and management to use automated test instead of manual test If you like these, please vote for me!

    Read the article

  • What are the disadvantages of automated testing?

    - by jkohlhepp
    There are a number of questions on this site that give plenty of information about the benefits that can be gained from automated testing. But I didn't see anything that represented the other side of the coin: what are the disadvantages? Everything in life is a tradeoff and there are no silver bullets, so surely there must be some valid reasons not to do automated testing. What are they? Here's a few that I've come up with: Requires more initial developer time for a given feature Requires a higher skill level of team members Increase tooling needs (test runners, frameworks, etc.) Complex analysis required when a failed test in encountered - is this test obsolete due to my change or is it telling me I made a mistake? Edit I should say that I am a huge proponent of automated testing, and I'm not looking to be convinced to do it. I'm looking to understand what the disadvantages are so when I go to my company to make a case for it I don't look like I'm throwing around the next imaginary silver bullet. Also, I'm explicity not looking for someone to dispute my examples above. I am taking as true that there must be some disadvantages (everything has trade-offs) and I want to understand what those are.

    Read the article

  • Database Connectivity Test with UDL File

    - by Ben Griswold
    I bounced around between projects a lot last week.  What each project had in common was the need to validate at least one SQL connection.  Whether you have SQL tools like SSMS installed or not, this is a very easy task if you are aware of the UDL (Universal Data Link) files.  Create a new file and name it anything as long as it has the .udl extension. Open the file, choose a provider: Click Next >> or navigate to the Connection Tab to provide connection information.  Once you provide server and login credentials, the database list will populate.  At this point, you know the connection is valid. but go ahead and click the Test Connection button anyway. On the final tab, you can provide extra connection information like Application Name which can come in handy.  The All tab is beneficial if you want to build a valid connection string to include in your own applications.  If you save the file and then open in Notepad, you’ll find that said connection string: Provider=SQLOLEDB.1;Integrated Security=SSPI;Persist Security Info=False;Initial Catalog=master;Data Source=(local);Application Name=TestApp I hope this tip helps save you some time.  How do you test if you don’t have SSMS installed?

    Read the article

  • A Generic RIDC Test Program

    - by Kevin Smith
    Many times I have found it useful to use a java program that communicates with WebCenter Content (WCC) using RIDC for testing. I might not have access to the web GUI or need to test a service running as a specific user. In the past I had created a number of "one off" programs that submitted specific services, e.g GET_SEARCH_RESULTS, DOCINFO, etc. Recently I decided to create a generic RIDC test program that could submit any service with the desired parameters based on a configuration file. The programs gets the following information from the configuration file: WCC connection information (host, port) User to use to run service Service to run Any parameters for the service The program will make a connection to the WCC server, send the service request, and print the results of the service call using the getResponseAsString() method. Here is a sample configuration file: ridc.host=localhostridc.port=4444ridc.user=sysadminridc.idcservice=GET_SEARCH_RESULTSidcservice.QueryText=dDocType <matches> `Document`idcservice.SortField=dDocNameidcservice.SortDesc=ASC There is a readme file included in the zip with instructions for how to configure and run the program. The program takes one command line argument, the configuration file name. The configuration file name is optional and defaults to config.properties. If you have any suggestions for improvements let me know. Right now it only submits a single service call each time you run it. One enhancement I have already thought about would be to allow you to specify multiple services to tun in the configuration file. You can do that with the current program by having multiple configuration files and running the program multiple times, each with a different configuration file. You can download the program here.

    Read the article

  • What if I can't make my unit test fail in "Red, Green, Refactor" of TDD?

    - by Joshua Harris
    So let's say that I have a test: @Test public void MoveY_MoveZero_DoesNotMove() { Point p = new Point(50.0, 50.0); p.MoveY(0.0); Assert.assertAreEqual(50.0, p.Y); } This test then causes me to create the class Point: public class Point { double X; double Y; public void MoveY(double yDisplace) { throw new NotYetImplementedException(); } } Ok. It fails. Good. Then I remove the exception and I get green. Great, but of course I need to test if it changes value. So I write a test that calls p.MoveY(10.0) and checks if p.Y is equal to 60.0. It fails, so then I change the function to look like so: public void MoveY(double yDisplace) { Y += yDisplace; } Great, now I have green again and I can move on. I've tested not moving and moving in the positive direction, so naturally I should test a negative value. The only problem with this test is that if I wrote the test correctly, then it doesn't fail at first. That means that I didn't fit the principle of "Red, Green, Refactor." Of course, This is a first-world problem of TDD, but getting a fail at first is helpful in that it shows that your test can fail. Otherwise this seemingly innocent test that is just passing for incorrect reasons could fail later because it was written wrong. That might not be a problem if it happened 5 minutes later, but what if it happens to the poor-sap that inheirited your code two years later. What he knows is that MoveY does not work with negative values because that is what the test is telling him. But, it really could work and just be a bug in the test. I don't think that would happen in this particular case because the code sample is so simple, but if it were a large complicated system that might not be the case. It seems crazy to say that I want to fail my tests, but that is an important step in TDD, for good reasons.

    Read the article

  • Requesting quality analysis test cases up front of implementation/change

    - by arin
    Recently I have been assigned to work on a major requirement that falls between a change request and an improvement. The previous implementation was done (badly) by a senior developer that left the company and did so without leaving a trace of documentation. Here were my initial steps to approach this problem: Considering that the release date was fast approaching and there was no time for slip-ups, I initially asked if the requirement was a "must have". Since the requirement helped the product significantly in terms of usability, the answer was "If possible, yes". Knowing the wide-spread use and affects of this requirement, had it come to a point where the requirement could not be finished prior to release, I asked if it would be a viable option to thrash the current state and revert back to the state prior to the ex-senior implementation. The answer was "Most likely: no". Understanding that the requirement was coming from the higher management, and due to the complexity of it, I asked all usability test cases to be written prior to the implementation (by QA) and given to me, to aid me in the comprehension of this task. This was a big no-no for the folks at the management as they failed to understand this approach. Knowing that I had to insist on my request and the responsibility of this requirement, I insisted and have fallen out of favor with some of the folks, leaving me in a state of "baffledness". Basically, I was trying a test-driven approach to a high-risk, high-complexity and must-have requirement and trying to be safe rather than sorry. Is this approach wrong or have I approached it incorrectly? P.S.: The change request/improvement was cancelled and the implementation was reverted back to the prior state due to the complexity of the problem and lack of time. This only happened after a 2 hour long meeting with other seniors in order to convince the aforementioned folks.

    Read the article

  • TDD with SQL and data manipulation functions

    - by Xophmeister
    While I'm a professional programmer, I've never been formally trained in software engineering. As I'm frequently visiting here and SO, I've noticed a trend for writing unit tests whenever possible and, as my software gets more complex and sophisticated, I see automated testing as a good idea in aiding debugging. However, most of my work involves writing complex SQL and then processing the output in some way. How would you write a test to ensure your SQL was returning the correct data, for example? Then, say if the data wasn't under your control (e.g., that of a 3rd party system), how can you efficiently test your processing routines without having to hand write reams of dummy data? The best solution I can think of is making views of the data that, together, cover most cases. I can then join those views with my SQL to see if it's returning the correct records and manually process the views to see if my functions, etc. are doing what they're supposed to. Still, it seems excessive and flakey; particularly finding data to test against...

    Read the article

  • Should I use a seperate class per test?

    - by user460667
    Taking the following simple method, how would you suggest I write a unit test for it (I am using MSTest however concepts are similar in other tools). public void MyMethod(MyObject myObj, bool validInput) { if(!validInput) { // Do nothing } else { // Update the object myObj.CurrentDateTime = DateTime.Now; myObj.Name = "Hello World"; } } If I try and follow the rule of one assert per test, my logic would be that I should have a Class Initialise method which executes the method and then individual tests which check each property on myobj. public class void MyTest { MyObj myObj; [TestInitialize] public void MyTestInitialize() { this.myObj = new MyObj(); MyMethod(myObj, true); } [TestMethod] public void IsValidName() { Assert.AreEqual("Hello World", this.myObj.Name); } [TestMethod] public void IsDateNotNull() { Assert.IsNotNull(this.myObj.CurrentDateTime); } } Where I am confused is around the TestInitialize. If I execute the method under TestInitialize, I would need seperate classes per variation of parameter inputs. Is this correct? This would leave me with a huge number of files in my project (unless I have multiple classes per file). Thanks

    Read the article

  • Where Are Multiple JUnit Test Methods Typically Placed in Code?

    - by Thunderforge
    I've just read the Vogella JUnit tutorial and found it very helpful in understanding how to use JUnit. However, I'm a bit confused about what the convention is for placing multiple test methods in code. The tutorial only places one test method in a class, then describes how you can use a test suite to group multiple test classes together. Does this mean that it's common practice for each test class to only have one test method and then test suites are used to chain them together? Or was that just unintended and instead common practice is to put multiple test methods in a class?

    Read the article

  • SourceMonitor Beta Test Version 3.3.2.261 now available

    - by TATWORTH
    Source Monitor is a useful independent utility for producing code metrics. Beta Test Version 3.3.2.261 has been released.Download and test Source Monitor beta (Version 3.3.2.261 - 2.30 MBytes)  via HTTP"The Beta page is at http://www.campwoodsw.com/smbeta.htmlHere is the official description of it>The freeware program Source Monitor lets you see inside your software source code to find out how much code you have and to identify the relative complexity of your modules. For example, you can use Source Monitor to identify the code that is most likely to contain defects and thus warrants formal review. Source Monitor, written in C++, runs through your code at high speed. Source Monitor provides the following: Collects metrics in a fast, single pass through source files.Measures metrics for source code written in C++, C, C#, VB.NET, Java, Delphi, Visual Basic (VB6) or HTML.Includes method and function level metrics for C++, C, C#, VB.NET, Java, and Delphi. Offers Modified Complexity metric option. Saves metrics in checkpoints for comparison during software development projects.Displays and prints metrics in tables and charts, including Kiviat diagrams.Operates within a standard Windows GUI or inside your scripts using XML command files.Exports metrics to XML or CSV (comma-separated-value) files for further processing with other tools.

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu 14.04 disk utility SMART self-test failed threshold not exceeded

    - by user2323470
    I'm using the "Disks" program in Ubuntu 14.04 (live DVD) to assess the health of a drive I suspect is failing. However, when I first opened the program, it showed that the overall health was OK and all assessments are OK as well. I then tried to run a short self-test, but now the overall assessment shows a red "SELF-TEST FAILED". In the details section it says "Last self-test failed (read)" and "threshold not exceeded". All individual assessments are still OK though!! What I don't understand is, does that mean that the test executed and determined that the drive is a goner, or does it mean that the test didn't actually execute properly?

    Read the article

  • Synergy 1.3.6 on Windows 7 Test not working

    - by Joel Avery
    So I have the client running, says perfectly connected to server when I run a test I run the same test on the server and it just says "running test. press stop to end test" and no output log file comes up like on the client. Then I stop the test it says synergy is about to quot with errors and warnings. Please check the log then click OK. Except for the log didnt come up and I don't know how to access the log from command prompt. And I'm pretty sure my thing is set up correct: section: links Joel-HP: left = JoelPC2 JoelPC2: right = Joel-HP end My Windows 7 64 bit server is on the right, Windows 7 32 bit client on left Both client and server are run as admin.

    Read the article

  • Bash - Test for multiple users

    - by Mike Purcell
    I am trying to test if current user one of two allowed users to start a process, but I can't seem to get the multi-condition to work correctly: test ($(whoami) != 'mpurcell' || $(whoami) != 'root')) && (echo "Cannot start script as non-ccast user..."; exit 1) Is there a way to test multiple users without have to enter two lines, like this: test $(whoami) != 'mpurcell' && (echo "Cannot start script as non-ccast user..."; exit 1) test $(whoami) != 'root' && (echo "Cannot start script as non-ccast user..."; exit 1)

    Read the article

  • Where do we put "asking the world" code when we separate computation from side effects?

    - by Alexey
    According to Command-Query Separation principle, as well as Thinking in Data and DDD with Clojure presentations one should separate side effects (modifying the world) from computations and decisions, so that it would be easier to understand and test both parts. This leaves an unanswered question: where relatively to the boundary should we put "asking the world"? On the one hand, requesting data from external systems (like database, extental services' APIs etc) is not referentially transparent and thus should not sit together with pure computational and decision making code. On the other hand, it's problematic, or maybe impossible to tease them apart from computational part and pass it as an argument as because we may not know in advance which data we may need to request.

    Read the article

  • How do I check that my tests were not removed by other developers?

    - by parxier
    I've just came across an interesting collaborative coding issue at work. I've written some unit/functional/integration tests and implemented new functionality into application that's got ~20 developers working on it. All tests passed and I checked in the code. Next day I updated my project and noticed (by chance) that some of my test methods were deleted by other developers (merging problems on their end). New application code was not touched. How can I detect such problem automatically? I mean, I write tests to automatically check that my code still works (or was not deleted), how do I do the same for tests? We're using Java, JUnit, Selenium, SVN and Hudson CI if it matters.

    Read the article

  • Introducing Typemock Test Lint

    We just released a new, free product -  Typemock Test Lint, click here for all the gory details. Its a just-in-time unit testing coach that looks at your code as you type and looks for common unit testing errors. Or, you can just watch this movie: ...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • How to Stress Test the Hard Drives in Your PC or Server

    - by Tim Smith
    You have the latest drives for your server.  You stacked the top-of-the line RAM in the system.  You run effective code for your system.  However, what throughput is your system capable of handling, and can you really trust the capabilities listed by hardware companies? How to Stress Test the Hard Drives in Your PC or Server How To Customize Your Android Lock Screen with WidgetLocker The Best Free Portable Apps for Your Flash Drive Toolkit

    Read the article

  • Use a Fake Http Channel to Unit Test with HttpClient

    - by Steve Michelotti
    Applications get data from lots of different sources. The most common is to get data from a database or a web service. Typically, we encapsulate calls to a database in a Repository object and we create some sort of IRepository interface as an abstraction to decouple between layers and enable easier unit testing by leveraging faking and mocking. This works great for database interaction. However, when consuming a RESTful web service, this is is not always the best approach. The WCF Web APIs that are available on CodePlex (current drop is Preview 3) provide a variety of features to make building HTTP REST services more robust. When you download the latest bits, you’ll also find a new HttpClient which has been updated for .NET 4.0 as compared to the one that shipped for 3.5 in the original REST Starter Kit. The HttpClient currently provides the best API for consuming REST services on the .NET platform and the WCF Web APIs provide a number of extension methods which extend HttpClient and make it even easier to use. Let’s say you have a client application that is consuming an HTTP service – this could be Silverlight, WPF, or any UI technology but for my example I’ll use an MVC application: 1: using System; 2: using System.Net.Http; 3: using System.Web.Mvc; 4: using FakeChannelExample.Models; 5: using Microsoft.Runtime.Serialization; 6:   7: namespace FakeChannelExample.Controllers 8: { 9: public class HomeController : Controller 10: { 11: private readonly HttpClient httpClient; 12:   13: public HomeController(HttpClient httpClient) 14: { 15: this.httpClient = httpClient; 16: } 17:   18: public ActionResult Index() 19: { 20: var response = httpClient.Get("Person(1)"); 21: var person = response.Content.ReadAsDataContract<Person>(); 22:   23: this.ViewBag.Message = person.FirstName + " " + person.LastName; 24: 25: return View(); 26: } 27: } 28: } On line #20 of the code above you can see I’m performing an HTTP GET request to a Person resource exposed by an HTTP service. On line #21, I use the ReadAsDataContract() extension method provided by the WCF Web APIs to serialize to a Person object. In this example, the HttpClient is being passed into the constructor by MVC’s dependency resolver – in this case, I’m using StructureMap as an IoC and my StructureMap initialization code looks like this: 1: using StructureMap; 2: using System.Net.Http; 3:   4: namespace FakeChannelExample 5: { 6: public static class IoC 7: { 8: public static IContainer Initialize() 9: { 10: ObjectFactory.Initialize(x => 11: { 12: x.For<HttpClient>().Use(() => new HttpClient("http://localhost:31614/")); 13: }); 14: return ObjectFactory.Container; 15: } 16: } 17: } My controller code currently depends on a concrete instance of the HttpClient. Now I *could* create some sort of interface and wrap the HttpClient in this interface and use that object inside my controller instead – however, there are a few why reasons that is not desirable: For one thing, the API provided by the HttpClient provides nice features for dealing with HTTP services. I don’t really *want* these to look like C# RPC method calls – when HTTP services have REST features, I may want to inspect HTTP response headers and hypermedia contained within the message so that I can make intelligent decisions as to what to do next in my workflow (although I don’t happen to be doing these things in my example above) – this type of workflow is common in hypermedia REST scenarios. If I just encapsulate HttpClient behind some IRepository interface and make it look like a C# RPC method call, it will become difficult to take advantage of these types of things. Second, it could get pretty mind-numbing to have to create interfaces all over the place just to wrap the HttpClient. Then you’re probably going to have to hard-code HTTP knowledge into your code to formulate requests rather than just “following the links” that the hypermedia in a message might provide. Third, at first glance it might appear that we need to create an interface to facilitate unit testing, but actually it’s unnecessary. Even though the code above is dependent on a concrete type, it’s actually very easy to fake the data in a unit test. The HttpClient provides a Channel property (of type HttpMessageChannel) which allows you to create a fake message channel which can be leveraged in unit testing. In this case, what I want is to be able to write a unit test that just returns fake data. I also want this to be as re-usable as possible for my unit testing. I want to be able to write a unit test that looks like this: 1: [TestClass] 2: public class HomeControllerTest 3: { 4: [TestMethod] 5: public void Index() 6: { 7: // Arrange 8: var httpClient = new HttpClient("http://foo.com"); 9: httpClient.Channel = new FakeHttpChannel<Person>(new Person { FirstName = "Joe", LastName = "Blow" }); 10:   11: HomeController controller = new HomeController(httpClient); 12:   13: // Act 14: ViewResult result = controller.Index() as ViewResult; 15:   16: // Assert 17: Assert.AreEqual("Joe Blow", result.ViewBag.Message); 18: } 19: } Notice on line #9, I’m setting the Channel property of the HttpClient to be a fake channel. I’m also specifying the fake object that I want to be in the response on my “fake” Http request. I don’t need to rely on any mocking frameworks to do this. All I need is my FakeHttpChannel. The code to do this is not complex: 1: using System; 2: using System.IO; 3: using System.Net.Http; 4: using System.Runtime.Serialization; 5: using System.Threading; 6: using FakeChannelExample.Models; 7:   8: namespace FakeChannelExample.Tests 9: { 10: public class FakeHttpChannel<T> : HttpClientChannel 11: { 12: private T responseObject; 13:   14: public FakeHttpChannel(T responseObject) 15: { 16: this.responseObject = responseObject; 17: } 18:   19: protected override HttpResponseMessage Send(HttpRequestMessage request, CancellationToken cancellationToken) 20: { 21: return new HttpResponseMessage() 22: { 23: RequestMessage = request, 24: Content = new StreamContent(this.GetContentStream()) 25: }; 26: } 27:   28: private Stream GetContentStream() 29: { 30: var serializer = new DataContractSerializer(typeof(T)); 31: Stream stream = new MemoryStream(); 32: serializer.WriteObject(stream, this.responseObject); 33: stream.Position = 0; 34: return stream; 35: } 36: } 37: } The HttpClientChannel provides a Send() method which you can override to return any HttpResponseMessage that you want. You can see I’m using the DataContractSerializer to serialize the object and write it to a stream. That’s all you need to do. In the example above, the only thing I’ve chosen to do is to provide a way to return different response objects. But there are many more features you could add to your own re-usable FakeHttpChannel. For example, you might want to provide the ability to add HTTP headers to the message. You might want to use a different serializer other than the DataContractSerializer. You might want to provide custom hypermedia in the response as well as just an object or set HTTP response codes. This list goes on. This is the just one example of the really cool features being added to the next version of WCF to enable various HTTP scenarios. The code sample for this post can be downloaded here.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >