Search Results

Search found 7802 results on 313 pages for 'unit tests'.

Page 23/313 | < Previous Page | 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30  | Next Page >

  • castle monorail unit test rendertext

    - by MikeWyatt
    I'm doing some maintenance on an older web application written in Monorail v1.0.3. I want to unit test an action that uses RenderText(). How do I extract the content in my test? Reading from controller.Response.OutputStream doesn't work, since the response stream is either not setup properly in PrepareController(), or is closed in RenderText(). Example Action public DeleteFoo( int id ) { var success= false; var foo = Service.Get<Foo>( id ); if( foo != null && CurrentUser.IsInRole( "CanDeleteFoo" ) ) { Service.Delete<Foo>( id ); success = true; } CancelView(); RenderText( "{ success: " + success + " }" ); } Example Test (using Moq) [Test] public void DeleteFoo() { var controller = new MyController (); PrepareController ( controller ); var foo = new Foo { Id = 123 }; var mockService = new Mock < Service > (); mockService.Setup ( s => s.Get<Foo> ( foo.Id ) ).Returns ( foo ); controller.Service = mockService.Object; controller.DeleteTicket ( ticket.Id ); mockService.Verify ( s => s.Delete<Foo> ( foo.Id ) ); Assert.AreEqual ( "{success:true}", GetResponse ( Response ) ); } // response.OutputStream.Seek throws an "System.ObjectDisposedException: Cannot access a closed Stream." exception private static string GetResponse( IResponse response ) { response.OutputStream.Seek ( 0, SeekOrigin.Begin ); var buffer = new byte[response.OutputStream.Length]; response.OutputStream.Read ( buffer, 0, buffer.Length ); return Encoding.ASCII.GetString ( buffer ); }

    Read the article

  • Unit test complex classes with many private methods

    - by Simon G
    Hi, I've got a class with one public method and many private methods which are run depending on what parameter are passed to the public method so my code looks something like: public class SomeComplexClass { IRepository _repository; public SomeComplexClass() this(new Repository()) { } public SomeComplexClass(IRepository repository) { _repository = repository; } public List<int> SomeComplexCalcualation(int option) { var list = new List<int>(); if (option == 1) list = CalculateOptionOne(); else if (option == 2) list = CalculateOptionTwo(); else if (option == 3) list = CalculateOptionThree(); else if (option == 4) list = CalculateOptionFour(); else if (option == 5) list = CalculateOptionFive(); return list; } private List<int> CalculateOptionOne() { // Some calculation } private List<int> CalculateOptionTwo() { // Some calculation } private List<int> CalculateOptionThree() { // Some calculation } private List<int> CalculateOptionFour() { // Some calculation } private List<int> CalculateOptionFive() { // Some calculation } } I've thought of a few ways to test this class but all of them seem overly complex or expose the methods more than I would like. The options so far are: Set all the private methods to internal and use [assembly: InternalsVisibleTo()] Separate out all the private methods into a separate class and create an interface. Make all the methods virtual and in my tests create a new class that inherits from this class and override the methods. Are there any other options for testing the above class that would be better that what I've listed? If you would pick one of the ones I've listed can you explain why? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Sensible unit test possible?

    - by nkr1pt
    Could a sensible unit test be written for this code which extracts a rar archive by delegating it to a capable tool on the host system if one exists? I can write a test case based on the fact that my machine runs linux and the unrar tool is installed, but if another developer who runs windows would check out the code the test would fail, although there would be nothing wrong with the extractor code. I need to find a way to write a meaningful test which is not binded to the system and unrar tool installed. How would you tackle this? public class Extractor { private EventBus eventBus; private ExtractCommand[] linuxExtractCommands = new ExtractCommand[]{new LinuxUnrarCommand()}; private ExtractCommand[] windowsExtractCommands = new ExtractCommand[]{}; private ExtractCommand[] macExtractCommands = new ExtractCommand[]{}; @Inject public Extractor(EventBus eventBus) { this.eventBus = eventBus; } public boolean extract(DownloadCandidate downloadCandidate) { for (ExtractCommand command : getSystemSpecificExtractCommands()) { if (command.extract(downloadCandidate)) { eventBus.fireEvent(this, new ExtractCompletedEvent()); return true; } } eventBus.fireEvent(this, new ExtractFailedEvent()); return false; } private ExtractCommand[] getSystemSpecificExtractCommands() { String os = System.getProperty("os.name"); if (Pattern.compile("linux", Pattern.CASE_INSENSITIVE).matcher(os).find()) { return linuxExtractCommands; } else if (Pattern.compile("windows", Pattern.CASE_INSENSITIVE).matcher(os).find()) { return windowsExtractCommands; } else if (Pattern.compile("mac os x", Pattern.CASE_INSENSITIVE).matcher(os).find()) { return macExtractCommands; } return null; } }

    Read the article

  • Django formset unit test

    - by Py
    I can't running Unit Test with formset. I try to do a test: class NewClientTestCase(TestCase): def setUp(self): self.c = Client() def test_0_create_individual_with_same_adress(self): post_data = { 'ctype': User.CONTACT_INDIVIDUAL, 'username': 'dupond.f', 'email': '[email protected]', 'password': 'pwd', 'password2': 'pwd', 'civility': User.CIVILITY_MISTER, 'first_name': 'François', 'last_name': 'DUPOND', 'phone': '+33 1 34 12 52 30', 'gsm': '+33 6 34 12 52 30', 'fax': '+33 1 34 12 52 30', 'form-0-address1': '33 avenue Gambetta', 'form-0-address2': 'apt 50', 'form-0-zip_code': '75020', 'form-0-city': 'Paris', 'form-0-country': 'FRA', 'same_for_billing': True, } response = self.c.post(reverse('client:full_account'), post_data, follow=True) self.assertRedirects(response, '%s?created=1' % reverse('client:dashboard')) and i have this error: ValidationError: [u'ManagementForm data is missing or has been tampered with'] My view : def full_account(request, url_redirect=''): from forms import NewUserFullForm, AddressForm, BaseArticleFormSet fields_required = [] fields_notrequired = [] AddressFormSet = formset_factory(AddressForm, extra=2, formset=BaseArticleFormSet) if request.method == 'POST': form = NewUserFullForm(request.POST) objforms = AddressFormSet(request.POST) if objforms.is_valid() and form.is_valid(): user = form.save() address = objforms.forms[0].save() if url_redirect=='': url_redirect = '%s?created=1' % reverse('client:dashboard') logon(request, form.instance) return HttpResponseRedirect(url_redirect) else: form = NewUserFullForm() objforms = AddressFormSet() return direct_to_template(request, 'clients/full_account.html', { 'form':form, 'formset': objforms, 'tld_fr':False, }) and my form file : class BaseArticleFormSet(BaseFormSet): def clean(self): msg_err = _('Ce champ est obligatoire.') non_errors = True if 'same_for_billing' in self.data and self.data['same_for_billing'] == 'on': same_for_billing = True else: same_for_billing = False for i in [0, 1]: form = self.forms[i] for field in form.fields: name_field = 'form-%d-%s' % (i, field ) value_field = self.data[name_field].strip() if i == 0 and self.forms[0].fields[field].required and value_field =='': form.errors[field] = msg_err non_errors = False elif i == 1 and not same_for_billing and self.forms[1].fields[field].required and value_field =='': form.errors[field] = msg_err non_errors = False return non_errors class AddressForm(forms.ModelForm): class Meta: model = Address address1 = forms.CharField() address2 = forms.CharField(required=False) zip_code = forms.CharField() city = forms.CharField() country = forms.ChoiceField(choices=CountryField.COUNTRIES, initial='FRA')

    Read the article

  • Unit testing that an event is raised in C#, using reflection

    - by Thomas
    I want to test that setting a certain property (or more generally, executing some code) raises a certain event on my object. In that respect my problem is similar to http://stackoverflow.com/questions/248989/unit-testing-that-an-event-is-raised-in-c, but I need a lot of these tests and I hate boilerplate. So I'm looking for a more general solution, using reflection. Ideally, I would like to do something like this: [TestMethod] public void TestWidth() { MyClass myObject = new MyClass(); AssertRaisesEvent(() => { myObject.Width = 42; }, myObject, "WidthChanged"); } For the implementation of the AssertRaisesEvent, I've come this far: private void AssertRaisesEvent(Action action, object obj, string eventName) { EventInfo eventInfo = obj.GetType().GetEvent(eventName); int raisedCount = 0; Action incrementer = () => { ++raisedCount; }; Delegate handler = /* what goes here? */; eventInfo.AddEventHandler(obj, handler); action.Invoke(); eventInfo.RemoveEventHandler(obj, handler); Assert.AreEqual(1, raisedCount); } As you can see, my problem lies in creating a Delegate of the appropriate type for this event. The delegate should do nothing except invoke incrementer. Because of all the syntactic syrup in C#, my notion of how delegates and events really work is a bit hazy. How to do this?

    Read the article

  • Unit testing with Mocks. Test behaviour not implementation

    - by Kenny Eliasson
    Hi.. I always had a problem when unit testing classes that calls other classes, for example I have a class that creates a new user from a phone-number then saves it to the database and sends a SMS to the number provided. Like the code provided below. public class UserRegistrationProcess : IUserRegistration { private readonly IRepository _repository; private readonly ISmsService _smsService; public UserRegistrationProcess(IRepository repository, ISmsService smsService) { _repository = repository; _smsService = smsService; } public void Register(string phone) { var user = new User(phone); _repository.Save(user); _smsService.Send(phone, "Welcome", "Message!"); } } It is a really simple class but how would you go about and test it? At the moment im using Mocks but I dont really like it [Test] public void WhenRegistreringANewUser_TheNewUserIsSavedToTheDatabase() { var repository = new Mock<IRepository>(); var smsService = new Mock<ISmsService>(); var userRegistration = new UserRegistrationProcess(repository.Object, smsService.Object); var phone = "0768524440"; userRegistration.Register(phone); repository.Verify(x => x.Save(It.Is<User>(user => user.Phone == phone)), Times.Once()); } [Test] public void WhenRegistreringANewUser_ItWillSendANewSms() { var repository = new Mock<IRepository>(); var smsService = new Mock<ISmsService>(); var userRegistration = new UserRegistrationProcess(repository.Object, smsService.Object); var phone = "0768524440"; userRegistration.Register(phone); smsService.Verify(x => x.Send(phone, It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>()), Times.Once()); } It feels like I am testing the wrong thing here? Any thoughts on how to make this better?

    Read the article

  • Visual C++ overrides/mock objects for unit testing?

    - by Mark
    When I'm running unit tests, I want to be able to "stub out" or create a mock object, but I'm running into DLL Hell. For example: There are two DLL libraries built: A.dll and B.dll -- Classes in A.dll have calls to classes in B.dll so when A.dll was built, the link line was using B.lib for the defintions. My test driver (Foo.exe) is testing classes in A.dll, so it links against A.lib. However, I want to "stub out" some of the calls A.dll makes to B.dll with simple versions (return basic value, no DB look up, etc). I can't build an Override.dll that just overrides the needed methods (not entire classes) and replace B.dll because Foo.exe will A) complain that B.dll is missing if I just remove it and put Override.dll in it's place or B) if I rename Override.dll to B.dll, Foo.exe complains that there are unresolved symbols because Override.dll is not a complete implementation of B.dll. Is there a way to do this? Is there a way to statically link Foo.exe with A.lib, B.lib and Override.lib such that it will work without having to completely rebuild A.lib and B.lib to remove the __delcspec(dllexport)? Is there another option?

    Read the article

  • maven and unit testing - combining maven surefire plugin AND testNG eclipse plugin

    - by lisak
    Hey, could you please share your way of unit testing in eclipse ? Are you using surefire plugin, m2eclipse & maven, or only testNG eclipse plugin ? Do you combine these alternatives ? I'm using testNG + maven surefire-plugin and I had been using the testNG eclipse plugin a year ago so that I could see the results in testNG view. Then I started using Maven, but when I do "maven test phase" using m2eclipse, there is only console output and surefire reports that I can check in browser and to choose what test suite, test, or test method can be set up only via testng.xml. On the other hand, if you use only surefire plugin and you have some specific settings regarding classpath etc., that you rely on, then running tests via testNG eclipse plugin doesn't have to be compatible with your code. Using surefire plugin, the classpath is different - target/test-classes and target/classes - than using testNG plugin, that is using the project classpath. How do you go about what I was just talking about? Is it possible to synchronize "maven test" using m2eclipse and surefire plugin WITH testNG eclipse plugin and view ? EDITED: I'm also wondering, why the Maven project ("Java build path") output folder is target/classes for src/main and src/test whereas surefire plugin makes two locations target/test-classes and target/classes Thank you very much for your your opinions.

    Read the article

  • Unit testing, mocking - simple case: Service - Repository

    - by rafek
    Consider a following chunk of service: public class ProductService : IProductService { private IProductRepository _productRepository; // Some initlization stuff public Product GetProduct(int id) { try { return _productRepository.GetProduct(id); } catch (Exception e) { // log, wrap then throw } } } Let's consider a simple unit test: [Test] public void GetProduct_return_the_same_product_as_getProduct_on_productRepository() { var product = EntityGenerator.Product(); _productRepositoryMock.Setup(pr => pr.GetProduct(product.Id)).Returns(product); Product returnedProduct = _productService.GetProduct(product.Id); Assert.AreEqual(product, returnedProduct); _productRepositoryMock.VerifyAll(); } At first it seems that this test is ok. But let's change our service method a little bit: public Product GetProduct(int id) { try { var product = _productRepository.GetProduct(id); product.Owner = "totallyDifferentOwner"; return product; } catch (Exception e) { // log, wrap then throw } } How to rewrite a given test that it'd pass with the first service method and fail with a second one? How do you handle this kind of simple scenarios? HINT: A given test is bad coz product and returnedProduct is actually the same reference.

    Read the article

  • Understanding how software testing works and what to test.

    - by RHaguiuda
    Intro: I've seen lots of topics here on SO about software testing and other terms I don't understand. Problem: As a beginner developer I, unfortunately, have no idea how software testing works, not even how to test a simple function. This is a shame, but thats the truth. I also hope this question can help others beginners developers too. Question: Can you help me to understand this subject a little bit more? Maybe some questions to start would help: When I develop a function, how should I test it? For example: when working with a sum function, should I test every input value possible or just some limits? How about testing functions with strings as parameters? In a big program, do I have to test every single piece of code of it? When you guys program do you test every code written? How automated test works and how can I try one? How tools for automated testing works and what they do? I`ve heard about unit testing. Can I have a brief explanation on this? What is a testing framework? If possible please post some code with examples to clarify the ideas. Any help on this topic is very welcome! Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Testing When Correctness is Poorly Defined?

    - by dsimcha
    I generally try to use unit tests for any code that has easily defined correct behavior given some reasonably small, well-defined set of inputs. This works quite well for catching bugs, and I do it all the time in my personal library of generic functions. However, a lot of the code I write is data mining code that basically looks for significant patterns in large datasets. Correct behavior in this case is often not well defined and depends on a lot of different inputs in ways that are not easy for a human to predict (i.e. the math can't reasonably be done by hand, which is why I'm using a computer to solve the problem in the first place). These inputs can be very complex, to the point where coming up with a reasonable test case is near impossible. Identifying the edge cases that are worth testing is extremely difficult. Sometimes the algorithm isn't even deterministic. Usually, I do the best I can by using asserts for sanity checks and creating a small toy test case with a known pattern and informally seeing if the answer at least "looks reasonable", without it necessarily being objectively correct. Is there any better way to test these kinds of cases?

    Read the article

  • How can I unit test my custom validation attribute

    - by MightyAtom
    I have a custom asp.net mvc class validation attribute. My question is how can I unit test it? It would be one thing to test that the class has the attribute but this would not actually test that the logic inside it. This is what I want to test. [Serializable] [EligabilityStudentDebtsAttribute(ErrorMessage = "You must answer yes or no to all questions")] public class Eligability { [BooleanRequiredToBeTrue(ErrorMessage = "You must agree to the statements listed")] public bool StatementAgree { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "Please choose an option")] public bool? Income { get; set; } .....removed for brevity } [AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class)] public class EligabilityStudentDebtsAttribute : ValidationAttribute { // If AnyDebts is true then // StudentDebts must be true or false public override bool IsValid(object value) { Eligability elig = (Eligability)value; bool ok = true; if (elig.AnyDebts == true) { if (elig.StudentDebts == null) { ok = false; } } return ok; } } I have tried to write a test as follows but this does not work: [TestMethod] public void Eligability_model_StudentDebts_is_required_if_AnyDebts_is_true() { // Arrange var eligability = new Eligability(); var controller = new ApplicationController(); // Act controller.ModelState.Clear(); controller.ValidateModel(eligability); var actionResult = controller.Section2(eligability,null,string.Empty); // Assert Assert.IsInstanceOfType(actionResult, typeof(ViewResult)); Assert.AreEqual(string.Empty, ((ViewResult)actionResult).ViewName); Assert.AreEqual(eligability, ((ViewResult)actionResult).ViewData.Model); Assert.IsFalse(((ViewResult)actionResult).ViewData.ModelState.IsValid); } The ModelStateDictionary does not contain the key for this custom attribute. It only contains the attributes for the standard validation attributes. Why is this? What is the best way to test these custom attributes? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing an Event Firing From a Thread

    - by Dougc
    I'm having a problem unit testing a class which fires events when a thread starts and finishes. A cut down version of the offending source is as follows: public class ThreadRunner { private bool keepRunning; public event EventHandler Started; public event EventHandler Finished; public void StartThreadTest() { this.keepRunning = true; var thread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(this.LongRunningMethod)); thread.Start(); } public void FinishThreadTest() { this.keepRunning = false; } protected void OnStarted() { if (this.Started != null) this.Started(this, new EventArgs()); } protected void OnFinished() { if (this.Finished != null) this.Finished(this, new EventArgs()); } private void LongRunningMethod() { this.OnStarted(); while (this.keepRunning) Thread.Sleep(100); this.OnFinished(); } } I then have a test to check that the Finished event fires after the LongRunningMethod has finished as follows: [TestClass] public class ThreadRunnerTests { [TestMethod] public void CheckFinishedEventFiresTest() { var threadTest = new ThreadRunner(); bool finished = false; object locker = new object(); threadTest.Finished += delegate(object sender, EventArgs e) { lock (locker) { finished = true; Monitor.Pulse(locker); } }; threadTest.StartThreadTest(); threadTest.FinishThreadTest(); lock (locker) { Monitor.Wait(locker, 1000); Assert.IsTrue(finished); } } } So the idea here being that the test will block for a maximum of one second - or until the Finish event is fired - before checking whether the finished flag is set. Clearly I've done something wrong as sometimes the test will pass, sometimes it won't. Debugging seems very difficult as well as the breakpoints I'd expect to be hit (the OnFinished method, for example) don't always seem to be. I'm assuming this is just my misunderstanding of the way threading works, so hopefully someone can enlighten me.

    Read the article

  • .net mvc2 custom HtmlHelper extension unit testing

    - by alex
    My goal is to be able to unit test some custom HtmlHelper extensions - which use RenderPartial internally. http://ox.no/posts/mocking-htmlhelper-in-asp-net-mvc-2-and-3-using-moq I've tried using the method above to mock the HtmlHelper. However, I'm running into Null value exceptions. "Parameter name: view" Anyone have any idea?? Thanks. Below are the ideas of the code: [TestMethod] public void TestMethod1() { var helper = CreateHtmlHelper(new ViewDataDictionary()); helper.RenderPartial("Test"); // supposingly this line is within a method to be tested Assert.AreEqual("test", helper.ViewContext.Writer.ToString()); } public static HtmlHelper CreateHtmlHelper(ViewDataDictionary vd) { Mock<ViewContext> mockViewContext = new Mock<ViewContext>( new ControllerContext( new Mock<HttpContextBase>().Object, new RouteData(), new Mock<ControllerBase>().Object), new Mock<IView>().Object, vd, new TempDataDictionary(), new StringWriter()); var mockViewDataContainer = new Mock<IViewDataContainer>(); mockViewDataContainer.Setup(v => v.ViewData) .Returns(vd); return new HtmlHelper(mockViewContext.Object, mockViewDataContainer.Object); }

    Read the article

  • Framework or tool for "distributed unit testing"?

    - by user262646
    Is there any tool or framework able to make it easier to test distributed software written in Java? My system under test is a peer-to-peer software, and I'd like to perform testing using something like PNUnit, but with Java instead of .Net. The system under test is a framework I'm developing to build P2P applications. It uses JXTA as a lower subsystem, trying to hide some complexities of it. It's currently an academic project, so I'm pursuing simplicity at this moment. In my test, I want to demonstrate that a peer (running in its own process, possibly with multiple threads) can discover another one (running in another process or even another machine) and that they can exchange a few messages. I'm not using mocks nor stubs because I need to see both sides working simultaneously. I realize that some kind of coordination mechanism is needed, and PNUnit seems to be able to do that. I've bumped into some initiatives like Pisces, which "aims to provide a distributed testing environment that extends JUnit, giving the developer/tester an ability to run remote JUnits and create complex test suites that are composed of several remote JUnit tests running in parallel or serially", but this project and a few others I have found seem to be long dead.

    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

  • Unit test approach for generic classes/methods

    - by Greg
    Hi, What's the recommended way to cover off unit testing of generic classes/methods? For example (referring to my example code below). Would it be a case of have 2 or 3 times the tests to cover testing the methods with a few different types of TKey, TNode classes? Or is just one class enough? public class TopologyBase<TKey, TNode, TRelationship> where TNode : NodeBase<TKey>, new() where TRelationship : RelationshipBase<TKey>, new() { // Properties public Dictionary<TKey, NodeBase<TKey>> Nodes { get; private set; } public List<RelationshipBase<TKey>> Relationships { get; private set; } // Constructors protected TopologyBase() { Nodes = new Dictionary<TKey, NodeBase<TKey>>(); Relationships = new List<RelationshipBase<TKey>>(); } // Methods public TNode CreateNode(TKey key) { var node = new TNode {Key = key}; Nodes.Add(node.Key, node); return node; } public void CreateRelationship(NodeBase<TKey> parent, NodeBase<TKey> child) { . . .

    Read the article

  • Unit-testing a directive with isolated scope and bidirectional value

    - by unludo
    I want to unit test a directive which looks like this: angular.module('myApp', []) .directive('myTest', function () { return { restrict: 'E', scope: { message: '='}, replace: true, template: '<div ng-if="message"><p>{{message}}</p></div>', link: function (scope, element, attrs) { } }; }); Here is my failing test: describe('myTest directive:', function () { var scope, compile, validHTML; validHTML = '<my-test message="message"></my-test>'; beforeEach(module('myApp')); beforeEach(inject(function($compile, $rootScope){ scope = $rootScope.$new(); compile = $compile; })); function create() { var elem, compiledElem; elem = angular.element(validHTML); compiledElem = compile(elem)(scope); scope.$digest(); return compiledElem; } it('should have a scope on root element', function () { scope.message = 'not empty'; var el = create(); console.log(el.text()); expect(el.text()).toBeDefined(); expect(el.text()).not.toBe(''); }); }); Can you spot why it's failing? The corresponding jsFiddle Thanks :)

    Read the article

  • Do you do unit tests for non production code?

    - by Ikaso
    I am interested in the following scenario specifically. Suppose you have team that writes production code and a team that writes automatic tests. The team that writes automatic tests has a dedicated framework intended to write the automatic tests. Should the testing team write unit tests for their framework although the framework is not used in production?

    Read the article

  • AngularJS service returning promise unit test gives error No more request expected

    - by softweave
    I want to test a service (Bar) that invokes another service (Foo) and returns a promise. The test is currently failing with this error: Error: Unexpected request: GET foo.json No more request expected Here are the service definitions: // Foo service returns new objects having get function returning a promise angular.module('foo', []). factory('Foo', ['$http', function ($http) { function FooFactory(config) { var Foo = function (config) { angular.extend(this, config); }; Foo.prototype = { get: function (url, params, successFn, errorFn) { successFn = successFn || function (response) {}; errorFn = errorFn || function (response) {}; return $http.get(url, {}).then(successFn, errorFn); } }; return new Foo(config); }; return FooFactory; }]); // Bar service uses Foo service angular.module('bar', ['foo']). factory('Bar', ['Foo', function (Foo) { var foo = Foo(); return { getCurrentTime: function () { return foo.get('foo.json', {}, function (response) { return Date.parse(response.data.now); }); } }; }]); Here is my current test: 'use strict'; describe('bar tests', function () { var currentTime, currentTimeInMs, $q, $rootScope, mockFoo, mockFooFactory, Foo, Bar, now; currentTime = "March 26, 2014 13:10 UTC"; currentTimeInMs = Date.parse(currentTime); beforeEach(function () { // stub out enough of Foo to satisfy Bar service: // create mock object with function get: function(url, params, successFn, errorFn) // that promises to return a response with this property // { data: { now: "March 26, 2014 13:10 UTC" }}) mockFoo = { get: function (url, params, successFn, errorFn) { successFn = successFn || function (response) {}; errorFn = errorFn || function (response) {}; // setup deferred promise var deferred = $q.defer(); deferred.resolve({data: { now: currentTime }}); return (deferred.promise).then(successFn, errorFn); } }; // create mock Foo service mockFooFactory = function(config) { return mockFoo; }; module(function ($provide) { $provide.value('Foo', mockFooFactory); }); module('bar'); inject(function (_$q_, _$rootScope_, _Foo_, _Bar_) { $q = _$q_; $rootScope = _$rootScope_; Foo = _Foo_; Bar = _Bar_; }); }); it('getCurrentTime should return currentTimeInMs', function () { Bar.getCurrentTime().then(function (serverCurrentTime) { now = serverCurrentTime; }); $rootScope.$apply(); // resolve Bar promise expect(now).toEqual(currentTimeInMs); }); }); The error is being thrown at $rootScope.$apply(). I also tried using $rootScope.$digest(), but it gives the same error. Thanks in advance for any insight you can give me.

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing - Am I doing it right?

    - by baron
    Hi everyone, Basically I have been programing for a little while and after finishing my last project can fully understand how much easier it would have been if I'd have done TDD. I guess I'm still not doing it strictly as I am still writing code then writing a test for it, I don't quite get how the test becomes before the code if you don't know what structures and how your storing data etc... but anyway... Kind of hard to explain but basically lets say for example I have a Fruit objects with properties like id, color and cost. (All stored in textfile ignore completely any database logic etc) FruitID FruitName FruitColor FruitCost 1 Apple Red 1.2 2 Apple Green 1.4 3 Apple HalfHalf 1.5 This is all just for example. But lets say I have this is a collection of Fruit (it's a List<Fruit>) objects in this structure. And my logic will say to reorder the fruitids in the collection if a fruit is deleted (this is just how the solution needs to be). E.g. if 1 is deleted, object 2 takes fruit id 1, object 3 takes fruit id2. Now I want to test the code ive written which does the reordering, etc. How can I set this up to do the test? Here is where I've got so far. Basically I have fruitManager class with all the methods, like deletefruit, etc. It has the list usually but Ive changed hte method to test it so that it accepts a list, and the info on the fruit to delete, then returns the list. Unit-testing wise: Am I basically doing this the right way, or have I got the wrong idea? and then I test deleting different valued objects / datasets to ensure method is working properly. [Test] public void DeleteFruit() { var fruitList = CreateFruitList(); var fm = new FruitManager(); var resultList = fm.DeleteFruitTest("Apple", 2, fruitList); //Assert that fruitobject with x properties is not in list ? how } private static List<Fruit> CreateFruitList() { //Build test data var f01 = new Fruit {Name = "Apple",Id = 1, etc...}; var f02 = new Fruit {Name = "Apple",Id = 2, etc...}; var f03 = new Fruit {Name = "Apple",Id = 3, etc...}; var fruitList = new List<Fruit> {f01, f02, f03}; return fruitList; }

    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

  • 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

  • Working effectively unit tests / Anyone tried the in-assembly approach?

    - by CodingCrapper
    I'm trying to re-introduce unit testing into my team as our current coverage is very poor. Our system is quite large 40+ projects/assemblies. We current use a project named [SystemName].Test.csproj were all the test code is dumped and organised to represent the namespaces using folders. This approach is not very scalable and makes it difficult to find tests. I've been thinking about added a Tests folder to each project, this would put the unit tests "in the developers face" and make them easy to find. The downside is the Production release code would contain references to nunit, nmocks as well as the test code and test data.... Has anyone tried this approach? How is everyone else working with unit tests on large projects? Having a Tests project per "real" project/assembly would introduce too many new projs. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30  | Next Page >