Search Results

Search found 68011 results on 2721 pages for 'unit of work'.

Page 20/2721 | < Previous Page | 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >

  • Java unit test coverage numbers do not match.

    - by Dan
    Below is a class I have written in a web application I am building using Java Google App Engine. I have written Unit Tests using TestNG and all the tests pass. I then run EclEmma in Eclipse to see the test coverage on my code. All the functions show 100% coverage but the file as a whole is showing about 27% coverage. Where is the 73% uncovered code coming from? Can anyone help me understand how EclEmma works and why I am getting the discrepancy in numbers? package com.skaxo.sports.models; import javax.jdo.annotations.IdGeneratorStrategy; import javax.jdo.annotations.IdentityType; import javax.jdo.annotations.PersistenceCapable; import javax.jdo.annotations.Persistent; import javax.jdo.annotations.PrimaryKey; @PersistenceCapable(identityType= IdentityType.APPLICATION) public class Account { @PrimaryKey @Persistent(valueStrategy=IdGeneratorStrategy.IDENTITY) private Long id; @Persistent private String userId; @Persistent private String firstName; @Persistent private String lastName; @Persistent private String email; @Persistent private boolean termsOfService; @Persistent private boolean systemEmails; public Account() {} public Account(String firstName, String lastName, String email) { super(); this.firstName = firstName; this.lastName = lastName; this.email = email; } public Account(String userId) { super(); this.userId = userId; } public void setId(Long id) { this.id = id; } public Long getId() { return id; } public String getUserId() { return userId; } public void setUserId(String userId) { this.userId = userId; } public String getFirstName() { return firstName; } public void setFirstName(String firstName) { this.firstName = firstName; } public String getLastName() { return lastName; } public void setLastName(String lastName) { this.lastName = lastName; } public String getEmail() { return email; } public void setEmail(String email) { this.email = email; } public boolean acceptedTermsOfService() { return termsOfService; } public void setTermsOfService(boolean termsOfService) { this.termsOfService = termsOfService; } public boolean acceptedSystemEmails() { return systemEmails; } public void setSystemEmails(boolean systemEmails) { this.systemEmails = systemEmails; } } Below is the test code for the above class. package com.skaxo.sports.models; import static org.testng.Assert.assertEquals; import static org.testng.Assert.assertNotNull; import static org.testng.Assert.assertTrue; import static org.testng.Assert.assertFalse; import org.testng.annotations.BeforeTest; import org.testng.annotations.Test; public class AccountTest { @Test public void testId() { Account a = new Account(); a.setId(1L); assertEquals((Long) 1L, a.getId(), "ID"); a.setId(3L); assertNotNull(a.getId(), "The ID is set to null."); } @Test public void testUserId() { Account a = new Account(); a.setUserId("123456ABC"); assertEquals(a.getUserId(), "123456ABC", "User ID incorrect."); a = new Account("123456ABC"); assertEquals(a.getUserId(), "123456ABC", "User ID incorrect."); } @Test public void testFirstName() { Account a = new Account("Test", "User", "[email protected]"); assertEquals(a.getFirstName(), "Test", "User first name not equal to 'Test'."); a.setFirstName("John"); assertEquals(a.getFirstName(), "John", "User first name not equal to 'John'."); } @Test public void testLastName() { Account a = new Account("Test", "User", "[email protected]"); assertEquals(a.getLastName(), "User", "User last name not equal to 'User'."); a.setLastName("Doe"); assertEquals(a.getLastName(), "Doe", "User last name not equal to 'Doe'."); } @Test public void testEmail() { Account a = new Account("Test", "User", "[email protected]"); assertEquals(a.getEmail(), "[email protected]", "User email not equal to '[email protected]'."); a.setEmail("[email protected]"); assertEquals(a.getEmail(), "[email protected]", "User email not equal to '[email protected]'."); } @Test public void testAcceptedTermsOfService() { Account a = new Account(); a.setTermsOfService(true); assertTrue(a.acceptedTermsOfService(), "Accepted Terms of Service not true."); a.setTermsOfService(false); assertFalse(a.acceptedTermsOfService(), "Accepted Terms of Service not false."); } @Test public void testAcceptedSystemEmails() { Account a = new Account(); a.setSystemEmails(true); assertTrue(a.acceptedSystemEmails(), "System Emails is not true."); a.setSystemEmails(false); assertFalse(a.acceptedSystemEmails(), "System Emails is not false."); } }

    Read the article

  • Should you salary reflect how much work there is for you or does that not matter? [closed]

    - by Kevin Simper
    I am working in a consulting company, where the company mostly do IT support. The website is also only focused on IT support, and we do not therefore capture leads for the Web Department. We aim for Small busniess, which needs new computers and firewalls. We were having a performance conversation and talked about salary and my employer told that he was not impressed by the revenue I was generating. I told that I did not have enough work and I would like to get more tasks and project so that i could reach the goal, but that i did not think it was my fault that there was not enough work. He said that it was not his fault either, but he could not pay me more. Is he right that I should not get paid more just because my employee can not get enough Web projects, or should i be paid what i am worth not based on the work amount the sales generate?

    Read the article

  • During Spring unit test, data written to db but test not seeing the data

    - by richever
    I wrote a test case that extends AbstractTransactionalJUnit4SpringContextTests. The single test case I've written creates an instance of class User and attempts to write it to the database using Hibernate. The test code then uses SimpleJdbcTemplate to execute a simple select count(*) from the user table to determine if the user was persisted to the database or not. The test always fails though. I was suspect because in the Spring controller I wrote, the ability to save an instance of User to the db is successful. So I added the Rollback annotation to the unit test and sure enough, the data is written to the database since I can even see it in the appropriate table -- the transaction isn't rolled back when the test case is finished. Here's my test case: @ContextConfiguration(locations = { "classpath:context-daos.xml", "classpath:context-dataSource.xml", "classpath:context-hibernate.xml"}) public class UserDaoTest extends AbstractTransactionalJUnit4SpringContextTests { @Autowired private UserDao userDao; @Test @Rollback(false) public void teseCreateUser() { try { UserModel user = randomUser(); String username = user.getUserName(); long id = userDao.create(user); String query = "select count(*) from public.usr where usr_name = '%s'"; long count = simpleJdbcTemplate.queryForLong(String.format(query, username)); Assert.assertEquals("User with username should be in the db", 1, count); } catch (Exception e) { e.printStackTrace(); Assert.assertNull("testCreateUser: " + e.getMessage()); } } } I think I was remiss by not adding the configuration files. context-hibernate.xml <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation=" http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans-3.0.xsd> <bean id="namingStrategy" class="org.springframework.beans.factory.config.FieldRetrievingFactoryBean"> <property name="staticField"> <value>org.hibernate.cfg.ImprovedNamingStrategy.INSTANCE</value> </property> </bean> <bean id="sessionFactory" class="org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.LocalSessionFactoryBean" destroy-method="destroy" scope="singleton"> <property name="namingStrategy"> <ref bean="namingStrategy"/> </property> <property name="dataSource" ref="dataSource"/> <property name="mappingResources"> <list> <value>com/company/model/usr.hbm.xml</value> </list> </property> <property name="hibernateProperties"> <props> <prop key="hibernate.dialect">org.hibernate.dialect.PostgreSQLDialect</prop> <prop key="hibernate.show_sql">true</prop> <prop key="hibernate.use_sql_comments">true</prop> <prop key="hibernate.query.substitutions">yes 'Y', no 'N'</prop> <prop key="hibernate.cache.provider_class">org.hibernate.cache.EhCacheProvider</prop> <prop key="hibernate.cache.use_query_cache">true</prop> <prop key="hibernate.cache.use_minimal_puts">false</prop> <prop key="hibernate.cache.use_second_level_cache">true</prop> <prop key="hibernate.current_session_context_class">thread</prop> </props> </property> </bean> <bean id="transactionManager" class="org.springframework.orm.hibernate3.HibernateTransactionManager"> <property name="sessionFactory" ref="sessionFactory"/> <property name="nestedTransactionAllowed" value="false" /> </bean> <bean id="transactionInterceptor" class="org.springframework.transaction.interceptor.TransactionInterceptor"> <property name="transactionManager"> <ref local="transactionManager"/> </property> <property name="transactionAttributes"> <props> <prop key="create">PROPAGATION_REQUIRED</prop> <prop key="delete">PROPAGATION_REQUIRED</prop> <prop key="update">PROPAGATION_REQUIRED</prop> <prop key="*">PROPAGATION_SUPPORTS,readOnly</prop> </props> </property> </bean> </beans> context-dataSource.xml <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation=" http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans-3.0.xsd"> <bean id="dataSource" class="com.mchange.v2.c3p0.ComboPooledDataSource" destroy-method="close"> <property name="driverClass" value="org.postgresql.Driver" /> <property name="jdbcUrl" value="jdbc\:postgresql\://localhost:5432/company_dev" /> <property name="user" value="postgres" /> <property name="password" value="postgres" /> </bean> </beans> context-daos.xml <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <beans xmlns="http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation=" http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans http://www.springframework.org/schema/beans/spring-beans-3.0.xsd"> <bean id="extendedFinderNamingStrategy" class="com.company.dao.finder.impl.ExtendedFinderNamingStrategy"/> <bean id="finderIntroductionAdvisor" class="com.company.dao.finder.impl.FinderIntroductionAdvisor"/> <bean id="abstractDaoTarget" class="com.company.dao.impl.GenericDaoHibernateImpl" abstract="true" depends-on="sessionFactory"> <property name="sessionFactory"> <ref bean="sessionFactory"/> </property> <property name="namingStrategy"> <ref bean="extendedFinderNamingStrategy"/> </property> </bean> <bean id="abstractDao" class="org.springframework.aop.framework.ProxyFactoryBean" abstract="true"> <property name="interceptorNames"> <list> <value>transactionInterceptor</value> <value>finderIntroductionAdvisor</value> </list> </property> </bean> <bean id="userDao" parent="abstractDao"> <property name="proxyInterfaces"> <value>com.company.dao.UserDao</value> </property> <property name="target"> <bean parent="abstractDaoTarget"> <constructor-arg> <value>com.company.model.UserModel</value> </constructor-arg> </bean> </property> </bean> </beans> Some of this I've inherited from someone else. I wouldn't have used the proxying that is going on here because I'm not sure it's needed but this is what I'm working with. Any help much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Difficulty to start up with basic unit test (Sample from my book -- SportsStore)

    - by Richard77
    Hello, I'm really new in TDD and, actually, I'm trying to follow the sample from my book (SportsStore -- Pro ASP.NET MVC Framework/Steve Sanderson/APRESS). I'm on pages 103-105. Although there are more on this, as new to all of this, I'm concerned with the following statements. ProductsController controller = new ProductsController(repository); var result = controller.List(2); //... regarding the above statements, when I write this (as in the book), var products = result.ViewData.Model as IList<Product>; I get a compiler error "System.Web.MVC.ActionResult" does not contain a definition for ViewData ..." But, when I remove the List() from the statement, then the compiler error disapear. var result = controller.List(2);//Doesn't work var result = controller;//It works Is something wrong there? I checked Apress website for that book, but there is nothing listed as Errata or issue. So I'm really lost. Thanks for helping

    Read the article

  • Visual Studio 2008 Unit test does not pick up code changes unless I build the entire solution

    - by Orion Edwards
    Here's the scenario: Change my code: Change my unit test for that code With the cursor inside the unit test class/method, invoke VS2008's "Run tests in current context" command The visual studio "Output" window indicates that the code dll and the test dll both successfully build (in that order) The problem is however, that the unit test does not use the latest version of the dll which it has just built. Instead, it uses the previously built dll (which doesn't have the updated code in it), so the test fails. When adding a new method, this results in a MethodNotImplementedException, and when adding a class, it results in a TypeLoadException, both because the unit test thinks the new code is there, and it isn't!. If I'm just updating an existing method, then the test just fails due to incorrect results. I can 'work around' the problem by doing this Change my code: Change my unit test for that code Invoke VS2008's 'Build Solution' command With the cursor inside the unit test class/method, invoke VS2008's "Run tests in current context" command The problem is that doing a full build solution (even though nothing has changed) takes upwards of 30 seconds, as I have approx 50 C# projects, and VS2008 is not smart enough to realize that only 2 of them need to be looked at. Having to wait 30 seconds just to change 1 line of code and re-run a unit test is abysmal. Is there anything I can do to fix this? None of my code is in the GAC or anything funny like that, it's just ordinary old dll's (buiding against .NET 3.5SP1 on a win7/64bit machine) Please help!

    Read the article

  • How do you tell that your unit tests are correct?

    - by Jacob Adams
    I've only done minor unit testing at various points in my career. Whenever I start diving into it again, it always troubles me how to prove that my tests are correct. How can I tell that there isn't a bug in my unit test? Usually I end up running the app, proving it works, then using the unit test as a sort of regression test. What is the recommended approach and/or what is the approach you take to this problem? Edit: I also realize that you could write small, granular unit tests that would be easy to understand. However, if you assume that small, granular code is flawless and bulletproof, you could just write small, granular programs and not need unit testing. Edit2: For the arguments "unit testing is for making sure your changes don't break anything" and "this will only happen if the test has the exact same flaw as the code", what if the test overfits? It's possible to pass both good and bad code with a bad test. My main question is what good is unit testing since if your tests can be flawed you can't really improve your confidence in your code, can't really prove your refactoring worked, and can't really prove that you met the specification?

    Read the article

  • Unit tests and Test Runner problems under .Net 4.0

    - by Brett Rigby
    Hi there, We're trying to migrate a .Net 3.5 solution into .Net 4.0, but are experiencing complications with the testing frameworks that can operate using an assembly that is built using version 4.0 of the .Net Framework. Previously, we used NUnit 2.4.3.0 and NCover 1.5.8.0 within our NAnt scripts, but NUnit 2.4.3.0 doesn't like .Net 4.0 projects. So, we upgraded to a newer version of the NUnit framework within the test project itself, but then found that NCover 1.5.8.0 doesn't support this version of NUnit. We get errors in the code saying words to the effect of the assembly was built using a newer version of the .Net Framework than is currently in use, as it's using .Net Framework 2.0 to run the tools. We then tried using Gallio's Icarus test runner GUI, but found that this and MbUnit only support up to version 3.5 of the .Net Frameword and the result is "the tests will be ignored". In terms of the coverage side of things (for reporting into CruiseControl.net), we have found that PartCover is a good candidate for substituting-out NCover, (as the newer version of NCover is quite dear, and PartCover is free), but this is a few steps down the line yet, as we can't get the test runners to work first!! Can any shed any light on a testnig framework that will run under .Net 4.0 in the same way as I've described above? If not, I fear we may have to revert back to using .Net 3.5 until the manufacturers of the tooling that we're currently using have a chance to upgrade to .Net 4.0. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing a rails 2.3.5 plugin

    - by brad
    I'm writing a new plugin for a rails 2.3.5 app. I've included an app directory (which makes it an engine) so i can easily load some extra routes. Not sure if that affects anything. Anyway, in the test directory i have two files: test_helper.rb and my_plugin_test.rb These files were generated automatically using script/generate plugin my_plugin When I go to vendor/plugins/my_plugin directory and run rake test they don't seem to run. I get the following console output: (in /Users/me/Repos/my_app/source/trunk/vendor/plugins/my_plugin) /Users/me/.rvm/rubies/jruby-1.4.0/bin/jruby -I"lib:lib:test" "/Users/me/.rvm/gems/jruby-1.4.0/gems/rake-0.8.7/lib/rake/rake_test_loader.rb" "test/my_plugin_test.rb" So it obviously sees my test file, but none of the tests inside get run, I just get back to my console prompt. What am I missing here? I figured the generated code would work out of the box Here are the two files test_helper.rb require 'rubygems' require 'active_support' require 'active_support/test_case' my_plugin_test.rb require 'test_helper' class MyPluginTest < ActiveSupport::TestCase # Replace this with your real tests. test "the truth" do assert true end test "Factories are supported" do assert_not_nil Factory end end File structure vendor - plugins - my_plugin - app - config - routes.rb - generators - my_plugin - some generator files.rb - lib - my_plugin.rb - my_plugin - my_plugin_lib_file.rb - rails - init.rb - Rakefile - tasks - my_plugin_tasks.rake - test - test_helper.rb - my_plugin_test.rb

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing - Algorithm or Sample based ?

    - by ohadsc
    Say I'm trying to test a simple Set class public IntSet : IEnumerable<int> { Add(int i) {...} //IEnumerable implementation... } And suppose I'm trying to test that no duplicate values can exist in the set. My first option is to insert some sample data into the set, and test for duplicates using my knowledge of the data I used, for example: //OPTION 1 void InsertDuplicateValues_OnlyOneInstancePerValueShouldBeInTheSet() { var set = new IntSet(); //3 will be added 3 times var values = new List<int> {1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5}; foreach (int i in values) set.Add(i); //I know 3 is the only candidate to appear multiple times int counter = 0; foreach (int i in set) if (i == 3) counter++; Assert.AreEqual(1, counter); } My second option is to test for my condition generically: //OPTION 2 void InsertDuplicateValues_OnlyOneInstancePerValueShouldBeInTheSet() { var set = new IntSet(); //The following could even be a list of random numbers with a duplicate var values = new List<int> { 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5}; foreach (int i in values) set.Add(i); //I am not using my prior knowledge of the sample data //the following line would work for any data CollectionAssert.AreEquivalent(new HashSet<int>(values), set); } Of course, in this example, I conveniently have a set implementation to check against, as well as code to compare collections (CollectionAssert). But what if I didn't have either ? This is the situation when you are testing your real life custom business logic. Granted, testing for expected conditions generically covers more cases - but it becomes very similar to implementing the logic again (which is both tedious and useless - you can't use the same code to check itself!). Basically I'm asking whether my tests should look like "insert 1, 2, 3 then check something about 3" or "insert 1, 2, 3 and check for something in general" EDIT - To help me understand, please state in your answer if you prefer OPTION 1 or OPTION 2 (or neither, or that it depends on the case, etc )

    Read the article

  • "Work stealing" vs. "Work shrugging (tm)"?

    - by John
    Why is it that I can find lots of information on "work stealing" and nothing on a "work shrugging(tm)" as a load-balancing strategy? I am surprised because work-stealing seems to me to have an inherent weakness when implementating efficient fine-grained load-balancing. Vis:- Relying on consumer processors to implement distribution (by actively stealing) begs the question of what these processors do when they find no work? None of the work-stealing references and implementations I have come across so far address this issue satisfactorarily for me. They either:- 1) Manage not to disclose what they do with idle processors! [Cilk] (?anyone know?) 2) Have all idle processors sleep and wake periodically and scatter messages to the four winds to see if any work has arrived [e.g. JAWS] (= way too latent & inefficient for me). 3) Assume that it is acceptable to have processors "spinning" looking for work ( = non-starter for me!) Unless anyone thinks there is a solution for this I will move on to consider a "Work Shrugging(tm)" strategy. Having the task-producing processor distribute excess load seems to me inherently capable of a much more efficient implementation. However a quick google didn't show up anything under the heading of "Work Shrugging" so any pointers to prior-art would be welcome. tx Tags I would have added if I was allowed to [work-stealing]

    Read the article

  • can I run C# built-in unit test in build machine?

    - by 5YrsLaterDBA
    can I run C# built-in unit test in build machine which doesn't have Visual Studio installed? We are thinking add unit test to our Visual Studio 2008 C# project. Our build machine doesn't have VS installed and we want to integrate the new unit test with our auto-build system. Is MSTest the executable to launch the Team Test unit test?

    Read the article

  • How can one find software development work that involves directly the final end user?

    - by RJa
    I've worked in software development for 15 years and, while there have been signficant personal achievements and a lot of experience, I've always felt detached from the man/woman-on-the-street, the every day person, how it affects their lives, in a number of ways: the technologies: embedded software, hidden away, stuff not seen by the everyday person. Or process technology supporting manufactured products the size of the systems, meaning many jobs, divided up, work is abstract, not one person can see the whole picture the organisations: large, with departments dealing with different areas, the software, the hardware, the marketing, the sales, the customer support the locations and hours: out-of-town business parks away from the rest of society, fixed locations, inflexible: 9-5 everyday This to me seems typical of the companies I worked for and see elsewhere. Granted, there are positives such as the technology itself and usually being among high calibre co-workers, but the above points frustrate me about the industry because they detach the work from its meaning. How can one: change these things in an existing job, or compensate for them? find other work that avoids these and connects with the final end user? Job designs tend to focus on the job content and technical requirements rather than how the job aims to fulfil end user needs, is meaningful.

    Read the article

  • How do I test UrlHelper.RouteUrl()?

    - by Jeff Putz
    I'm having a tough go trying to figure out what I need to mock in my tests to show that UrlHelper.RouteUrl() is returning the right URL. It works, but I'd like to have the right test coverage. The meat of the controller method looks like this: var urlHelper = new UrlHelper(ControllerContext.RequestContext); return Json(new BasicJsonMessage { Result = true, Redirect = urlHelper.RouteUrl(new { controller = "TheController", action = "TheAction", id = somerecordnumber }) }); Testing the result object is easy enough, like this: var controller = new MyController(); var result = controller.DoTheNewHotness()); Assert.IsInstanceOf<JsonResult>(result); var data = (BasicJsonMessage)result.Data; Assert.IsTrue(data.Result); result.Redirect is always null because the controller obviously doesn't know anything about the routing. What do I have to do to the controller to let it know? As I said, I know it works when I exercise the production code, but I'd like some testing assurance. Thanks for your help!

    Read the article

  • How to Unit Test HtmlHelper with Moq?

    - by DaveDev
    Could somebody show me how you would go about creating a mock HTML Helper with Moq? This article has a link to an article claiming to describe this, but following the link only returns an ASP.NET Runtime Error [edit] I asked a more specific question related to the same subject here, but it hasn't gotten any responses. I figured it was too specific, so I thought I could get a more general answer to a more general question and modify it to meet my requirements. Thanks

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET Unit Testing - WatiN and Windows 7 / Internet Explorer 8

    - by tyndall
    Any tricks in getting WatiN to run on Win7/IE8? My code: browser = new IE(); browser.GoTo("http://testserver"); browser.TextField(Find.ByName("txtUser")).TypeText("tyndall"); The third line never really runs and I get an error back: System.Runtime.InteropServices.COMException : The RPC server is unavailable. (Exception from HRESULT: 0x800706BA) The second line seems to run. IE8 appears and is navigated to the correct URL.

    Read the article

  • MVC moq unit test the object before RedirecToAction()

    - by Daoming Yang
    I want to test the data inside the "item" object before it redirect to another action. public ActionResult WebPageEdit(WebPage item, FormCollection form) { if (ModelState.IsValid) { item.Description = Utils.CrossSiteScriptingAttackCheck(item.Description); item.Content = Utils.CrossSiteScriptingAttackCheck(item.Content); item.Title = item.Title.Trim(); item.DateUpdated = DateTime.Now; // Other logic stuff here webPagesRepository.Save(item); return RedirectToAction("WebPageList"); } Here is my Test method: [Test] public void Admin_WebPageEdit_Save() { var controller = new AdminController(); controller.webPagesRepository = DataMock.WebPageDataInit(); controller.categoriesRepository = DataMock.WebPageCategoryDataInit(); FormCollection form = DataMock.CreateWebPageFormCollection(); RedirectToRouteResult actionResult = (RedirectToRouteResult)controller.WebPageEdit(webPagesRepository.Get(1), form); Assert.IsNotNull(actionResult); Assert.AreEqual("WebPageList", actionResult.RouteValues["action"]); var item = ((ViewResult)controller.WebPageEdit(webPagesRepository.Get(1), form)).ViewData.Model as WebPage; Assert.NotNull(item); Assert.AreEqual(2, item.CategoryID); } It failed at this line: var item = ((ViewResult)controller.WebPageEdit(webPagesRepository.Get(1), form)).ViewData.Model as WebPage; I am thinking about is there any ways to test the "item" object before it redirect to other actions?

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing & Fake Repository implementation with cascading CRUD operations

    - by Erik Ashepa
    Hi, i'm having trouble writing integration tests which use a fake repository, For example : Suppose I have a classroom entity, which aggregates students... var classroom = new Classroom(); classroom.Students.Add(new Student("Adam")); _fakeRepository.Save(classroom); _fakeRepostiory.GetAll<Student>().Where((student) => student.Name == "Adam")); // This query will return null... When using my real implementation for repository (NHibernate based), the above code works (because the save operation would cascade to the student added at the previous line), Do you know of any fake repository implementation which support this behaviour? Ideas on how to implement one myself? Or do you have any other suggestions which could help me avoid this issue? Thanks in advance, Erik.

    Read the article

  • How to run concurrency unit test?

    - by janetsmith
    Hi, How to use junit to run concurrency test? Let's say I have a class public class MessageBoard { public synchronized void postMessage(String message) { .... } public void updateMessage(Long id, String message) { .... } } I wan to test multiple access to this postMessage concurrently. Any advice on this? I wish to run this kind of concurrency test against all my setter functions (or any methodn that involves create/update/delete operation). Thanks

    Read the article

  • Unit testing JSON output module, best practices

    - by Banang
    I am currently working on a module that takes one of our business objects and returns a json representation of that object to the caller. Due to limitations in our environment I am unable to use any existing json writer, so I have written my own, which is then used by the business object writer to serialize my objects. The json writer is tested in a way similar to this @Test public void writeEmptyArrayTest() { String expected = "[ ]"; writer.array().endArray(); assertEquals(expected, writer.toString()); } which is only manageable because of the small output each instruction produces, even though I keep feeling there must be a better way. The problem I am now facing is writing tests for the object writer module, where the output is much larger and much less manageable. The risk of spelling mistakes in the expected strings mucking up my tests seem too great, and writing code in this fashion seems both silly and unmanageable in a long term perspective. I keep feeling like I want to write tests to ensure that my tests are behaving correctly, and this feeling worries me. Therefore, is there a better way of doing this? Surely there must be? Does anyone know of any good literature in regard to this specific case (doesn't have to be json, but you know what I mean)? Grateful for all help.

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing Codeigniter Classes with fooStack - clashes

    - by DrPep
    I'm having 'fun' testing interactions in a CodeIgniter based web app. It seems when running the entire test suite "phpunit AllTests.php" it loads all of the test classes, their targets (Systems under Test) and creates a PHPUnit_Framework_TestSuite instance which presumably iterates over the classes which extend CIUnit_TestCase and runs them. The problem comes where you have multiple classes referencing another class (such as a library). As all the classes are loaded into the same process space, PHP reports "cannot redefine class xyz". Have I missed something here or doing something haenously wrong? In my test class i'm doing something like: include_once dirname(__FILE__).'/../CIUnit.php'; include_once dirname(__FILE__).'/../../libraries/ProductsService.php'; class testProductsService extends CIUnit_TestCase { public function testGetProducts_ReturnsArrayOfProducts(){ $service = new ProductsService(); $products = $service->getProducts(); $this->assertTrue(is_array($products)); } } The problem manifests as I have a controller which does: $this->load->library('ProductsService');

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing Refcounted Critical Section Class

    - by BillyONeal
    Hello all :) I'm looking at a simple class I have to manage critical sections and locks, and I'd like to cover this with test cases. Does this make sense, and how would one go about doing it? It's difficult because the only way to verify the class works is to setup very complicated threading scenarios, and even then there's not a good way to test for a leak of a Critical Section in Win32. Is there a more direct way to make sure it's working correctly? Here's the code: CriticalSection.hpp: #pragma once #include <windows.h> namespace WindowsAPI { namespace Threading { class CriticalSection; class CriticalLock { std::size_t *instanceCount; CRITICAL_SECTION * criticalStructure; bool lockValid; friend class CriticalSection; CriticalLock(std::size_t *, CRITICAL_SECTION *, bool); public: bool IsValid() { return lockValid; }; void Unlock(); ~CriticalLock() { Unlock(); }; }; class CriticalSection { std::size_t *instanceCount; CRITICAL_SECTION * criticalStructure; public: CriticalSection(); CriticalSection(const CriticalSection&); CriticalSection& operator=(const CriticalSection&); CriticalSection& swap(CriticalSection&); ~CriticalSection(); CriticalLock Enter(); CriticalLock TryEnter(); }; }} CriticalSection.cpp: #include "CriticalSection.hpp" namespace WindowsAPI { namespace Threading { CriticalSection::CriticalSection() { criticalStructure = new CRITICAL_SECTION; instanceCount = new std::size_t; *instanceCount = 1; InitializeCriticalSection(criticalStructure); } CriticalSection::CriticalSection(const CriticalSection& other) { criticalStructure = other.criticalStructure; instanceCount = other.instanceCount; instanceCount++; } CriticalSection& CriticalSection::operator=(const CriticalSection& other) { CriticalSection copyOfOther(other); swap(copyOfOther); return *this; } CriticalSection& CriticalSection::swap(CriticalSection& other) { std::swap(other.instanceCount, instanceCount); std::swap(other.criticalStructure, other.criticalStructure); return *this; } CriticalSection::~CriticalSection() { if (!--(*instanceCount)) { DeleteCriticalSection(criticalStructure); delete criticalStructure; delete instanceCount; } } CriticalLock CriticalSection::Enter() { EnterCriticalSection(criticalStructure); (*instanceCount)++; return CriticalLock(instanceCount, criticalStructure, true); } CriticalLock CriticalSection::TryEnter() { bool lockAquired; if (TryEnterCriticalSection(criticalStructure)) { (*instanceCount)++; lockAquired = true; } else lockAquired = false; return CriticalLock(instanceCount, criticalStructure, lockAquired); } void CriticalLock::Unlock() { if (!lockValid) return; LeaveCriticalSection(criticalStructure); lockValid = false; if (!--(*instanceCount)) { DeleteCriticalSection(criticalStructure); delete criticalStructure; delete instanceCount; } } }}

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing a Django Form with a FileField

    - by Jason Christa
    I have a form like: #forms.py from django import forms class MyForm(forms.Form): title = forms.CharField() file = forms.FileField() #tests.py from django.test import TestCase from forms import MyForm class FormTestCase(TestCase) def test_form(self): upload_file = open('path/to/file', 'r') post_dict = {'title': 'Test Title'} file_dict = {} #?????? form = MyForm(post_dict, file_dict) self.assertTrue(form.is_valid()) How do I construct the *file_dict* to pass *upload_file* to the form?

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing in ASP.NET MVC: Minimising the number of asserts per test

    - by Neil Barnwell
    I'm trying out TDD on a greenfield hobby app in ASP.NET MVC, and have started to get test methods such as the following: [Test] public void Index_GetRequest_ShouldReturnPopulatedIndexViewModel() { var controller = new EmployeeController(); controller.EmployeeService = GetPrePopulatedEmployeeService(); var actionResult = (ViewResult)controller.Index(); var employeeIndexViewModel = (EmployeeIndexViewModel)actionResult.ViewData.Model; EmployeeDetailsViewModel employeeViewModel = employeeIndexViewModel.Items[0]; Assert.AreEqual(1, employeeViewModel.ID); Assert.AreEqual("Neil Barnwell", employeeViewModel.Name); Assert.AreEqual("ABC123", employeeViewModel.PayrollNumber); } Now I'm aware that ideally tests will only have one Assert.xxx() call, but does that mean I should refactor the above to separate tests with names such as: Index_GetRequest_ShouldReturnPopulatedIndexViewModelWithCorrectID Index_GetRequest_ShouldReturnPopulatedIndexViewModelWithCorrectName Index_GetRequest_ShouldReturnPopulatedIndexViewModelWithCorrectPayrollNumber ...where the majority of the test is duplicated code (which therefore is being tested more than once and violates the "keep tests fast" advice)? That seems to be taking it to the extreme to me, so if I'm right as I am, what is the real-world meaning of the "one assert per test" advice?

    Read the article

  • Emma - Block Coverage vs Line Coverage

    - by MasterGaurav
    I have a strange scenario... while doing a EMMA coverage for UT, I get the total block coverage size more than line coverage size. For block coverage, the total size is some 50,000 while the line coverage is out of 18,000. I get (block-coverage-value) / 50,000 and (line-coverage-value) / 18,000 in the report. Is it possible? How can the number of blocks be more than the number of lines in code? btw, you can assume that I know what Block Coverage is: http://emma.sourceforge.net/faq.html#q.blockcoverage

    Read the article

  • How do I unit test a finalizer?

    - by GraemeF
    I have the following class which is a decorator for an IDisposable object (I have omitted the stuff it adds) which itself implements IDisposable using a common pattern: public class DisposableDecorator : IDisposable { private readonly IDisposable _innerDisposable; public DisposableDecorator(IDisposable innerDisposable) { _innerDisposable = innerDisposable; } #region IDisposable Members public void Dispose() { Dispose(true); GC.SuppressFinalize(this); } #endregion ~DisposableDecorator() { Dispose(false); } protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing) { if (disposing) _innerDisposable.Dispose(); } } I can easily test that innerDisposable is disposed when Dispose() is called: [Test] public void Dispose__DisposesInnerDisposable() { var mockInnerDisposable = new Mock<IDisposable>(); new DisposableDecorator(mockInnerDisposable.Object).Dispose(); mockInnerDisposable.Verify(x => x.Dispose()); } But how do I write a test to make sure innerDisposable does not get disposed by the finalizer? I want to write something like this but it fails, presumably because the finalizer hasn't been called by the GC thread: [Test] public void Finalizer__DoesNotDisposeInnerDisposable() { var mockInnerDisposable = new Mock<IDisposable>(); new DisposableDecorator(mockInnerDisposable.Object); GC.Collect(); mockInnerDisposable.Verify(x => x.Dispose(), Times.Never()); }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27  | Next Page >