Search Results

Search found 32072 results on 1283 pages for 'catch unit test'.

Page 24/1283 | < Previous Page | 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31  | Next Page >

  • jQuery validator not working in unit testing

    - by Dbugger
    I have this small HTML file: <html> <head></head> <body> <form id='MyForm'> <input type='text' required /> <input type='submit' /> </form> <script src="/js/jquery-1.9.0.js"></script> <script src="/js/jquery.validate.js"></script> <script> var validator = $("#MyForm").validate(); alert(validator.form()); </script> </body> </html> This alerts me with "false", which is the expected behaviour. The problem comes when I go to unit testing, with js-test-driver: TestCase("MyTests", { setUp: function() { this.myform = "<form id='MyForm'><input type='text' required /><input type='submit' /></form>"; this.validator = $(this.myform).validate(); jstestdriver.console.log("Does the form validate? " + this.validator.form()); }, test_empty: function() { }, }); This code returns me the string Does the form validate? true This is a simplified version of my project of course, but the point is that I dont seem to be able to unit test the validation module im developing, since the jQuery validate plugin doesnt seem to work. What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • Unit tests for deep cloning

    - by Will Dean
    Let's say I have a complex .NET class, with lots of arrays and other class object members. I need to be able to generate a deep clone of this object - so I write a Clone() method, and implement it with a simple BinaryFormatter serialize/deserialize - or perhaps I do the deep clone using some other technique which is more error prone and I'd like to make sure is tested. OK, so now (ok, I should have done it first) I'd like write tests which cover the cloning. All the members of the class are private, and my architecture is so good (!) that I haven't needed to write hundreds of public properties or other accessors. The class isn't IComparable or IEquatable, because that's not needed by the application. My unit tests are in a separate assembly to the production code. What approaches do people take to testing that the cloned object is a good copy? Do you write (or rewrite once you discover the need for the clone) all your unit tests for the class so that they can be invoked with either a 'virgin' object or with a clone of it? How would you test if part of the cloning wasn't deep enough - as this is just the kind of problem which can give hideous-to-find bugs later?

    Read the article

  • Unit testing and mocking email sender in Python with Google AppEngine

    - by CVertex
    I'm a newbie to python and the app engine. I have this code that sends an email based on request params after some auth logic. in my Unit tests (i'm using GAEUnit), how do I confirm an email with specific contents were sent? - i.e. how do I mock the emailer with a fake emailer to verify send was called? class EmailHandler(webapp.RequestHandler): def bad_input(self): self.response.set_status(400) self.response.headers['Content-Type'] = 'text/plain' self.response.out.write("<html><body>bad input </body></html>") def get(self): to_addr = self.request.get("to") subj = self.request.get("subject") msg = self.request.get("body") if not mail.is_email_valid(to_addr): # Return an error message... # self.bad_input() pass # authenticate here message = mail.EmailMessage() message.sender = "[email protected]" message.to = to_addr message.subject = subj message.body = msg message.send() self.response.headers['Content-Type'] = 'text/plain' self.response.out.write("<html><body>success!</body></html>") And the unit tests, import unittest from webtest import TestApp from google.appengine.ext import webapp from email import EmailHandler class SendingEmails(unittest.TestCase): def setUp(self): self.application = webapp.WSGIApplication([('/', EmailHandler)], debug=True) def test_success(self): app = TestApp(self.application) response = app.get('http://localhost:8080/[email protected]&body=blah_blah_blah&subject=mySubject') self.assertEqual('200 OK', response.status) self.assertTrue('success' in response) # somehow, assert email was sent

    Read the article

  • N-tier architecture and unit tests (using Java)

    - by Alexandre FILLATRE
    Hi there, I'd like to have your expert explanations about an architectural question. Imagine a Spring MVC webapp, with validation API (JSR 303). So for a request, I have a controller that handles the request, then passes it to the service layer, which passes to the DAO one. Here's my question. At which layer should the validation occur, and how ? My though is that the controller has to handle basic validation (are mandatory fields empty ? Is the field length ok ? etc.). Then the service layer can do some tricker stuff, that involve other objets. The DAO does no validation at all. BUT, if I want to implement some unit testing (i.e. test layers below service, not the controllers), I'll end up with unexpected behavior because some validations should have been done in the Controller layer. As we don't use it for unit testing, there is a problem. What is the best way to deal with this ? I know there is no universal answer, but your personal experience is very welcomed. Thanks a lot. Regards.

    Read the article

  • Best way to unit test Collection?

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

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Unit Testing Controllers - Repositories

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

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing the Use of TransactionScope

    - by Randolpho
    The preamble: I have designed a strongly interfaced and fully mockable data layer class that expects the business layer to create a TransactionScope when multiple calls should be included in a single transaction. The problem: I would like to unit test that my business layer makes use of a TransactionScope object when I expect it to. Unfortunately, the standard pattern for using TransactionScope is a follows: using(var scope = new TransactionScope()) { // transactional methods datalayer.InsertFoo(); datalayer.InsertBar(); scope.Complete(); } While this is a really great pattern in terms of usability for the programmer, testing that it's done seems... unpossible to me. I cannot detect that a transient object has been instantiated, let alone mock it to determine that a method was called on it. Yet my goal for coverage implies that I must. The Question: How can I go about building unit tests that ensure TransactionScope is used appropriately according to the standard pattern? Final Thoughts: I've considered a solution that would certainly provide the coverage I need, but have rejected it as overly complex and not conforming to the standard TransactionScope pattern. It involves adding a CreateTransactionScope method on my data layer object that returns an instance of TransactionScope. But because TransactionScope contains constructor logic and non-virtual methods and is therefore difficult if not impossible to mock, CreateTransactionScope would return an instance of DataLayerTransactionScope which would be a mockable facade into TransactionScope. While this might do the job it's complex and I would prefer to use the standard pattern. Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • C++ and Dependency Injection in unit testing

    - by lhumongous
    Suppose I have a C++ class like so: class A { public: A() { } void SetNewB( const B& _b ) { m_B = _b; } private: B m_B; } In order to unit test something like this, I would have to break A's dependency on B. Since class A holds onto an actual object and not a pointer, I would have to refactor this code to take a pointer. Additionally, I would need to create a parent interface class for B so I can pass in my own fake of B when I test SetNewB. In this case, doesn't unit testing with dependency injection further complicate the existing code? If I make B a pointer, I'm now introducing heap allocation, and some piece of code is now responsible for cleaning it up (unless I use ref counted pointers). Additionally, if B is a rather trivial class with only a couple of member variables and functions, why introduce a whole new interface for it instead of just testing with an instance of B? I suppose you could make the argument that it would be easier to refactor A by using an interface. But are there some cases where two classes might need to be tightly coupled?

    Read the article

  • Executing NUnit Tests using the Visual Studio 2012 Test Runner

    - by David Paquette
    At a recent Visual Studio 2012 event at the Calgary .NET User Group, I was told that I could run my NUnit tests directly in the Visual Studio 2012 without any special plugins.  Naturally, I was very excited and I immediately tried running my NUnit tests. I was somewhat disappointed to see that the Test Runner did not discover any of my NUnit tests.  Apparently, you do still need to install an extension that supports NUnit.  Microsoft has completely re-written the Test Runner in Visual Studio 2012 and opened it up for anyone to write Test Adapters for any unit test framework (not just MSTest).  Once the correct test adapters are installed, everything works great.  Luckily, there are a good number of adapters already written. Here are some Test Adapters that you might find useful: NUnit Test Adapter – This one is still in beta, but tit does work with the official Visual Studio 2012 release xUnit.net Test Adapter Silverlight Unit Test Adapter Chutzpah Test Adapter Overall, I still prefer the unit test runner in ReSharper, but this is a great new feature for those who might not have a ReSharper license.

    Read the article

  • What Exactly Does the Wattage Rating on a Power Supply Unit Mean?

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    Your PSU is rated 80 Plus Bronze and for 650 watts, but what exactly does that mean? Read on to see how wattage and power efficiency ratings translate to real world use. Today’s Question & Answer session comes to us courtesy of SuperUser—a subdivision of Stack Exchange, a community-drive grouping of Q&A web sites. How To Use USB Drives With the Nexus 7 and Other Android Devices Why Does 64-Bit Windows Need a Separate “Program Files (x86)” Folder? Why Your Android Phone Isn’t Getting Operating System Updates and What You Can Do About It

    Read the article

  • What is the best unit test framework for .NET and why?

    - by rmx
    It seems to me that everyone uses NUnit without even considering the other options. I think this is because: Everyone is familiar with it already so they won't have to learn a new API. It is already set up with their continuous integration server to work with NUnit. Am I wrong about this? I decided to use xUnit on one of my own projects recently and I love it! It makes so much more sense to me and conceptually it seems like a definite step forward from NUnit. I'd like to hear opinions on which framework is actually the best - not taking into consideration having to learn it or reconfigure your automated testing.

    Read the article

  • Rx Reactive extensions: Unit testing with FromAsyncPattern

    - by Andrew Anderson
    The Reactive Extensions have a sexy little hook to simplify calling async methods: var func = Observable.FromAsyncPattern<InType, OutType>( myWcfService.BeginDoStuff, myWcfService.EndDoStuff); func(inData).ObserveOnDispatcher().Subscribe(x => Foo(x)); I am using this in an WPF project, and it works great at runtime. Unfortunately, when trying to unit test methods that use this technique I am experiencing random failures. ~3 out of every five executions of a test that contain this code fails. Here is a sample test (implemented using a Rhino/unity auto-mocking container): [TestMethod()] public void SomeTest() { // arrange var container = GetAutoMockingContainer(); container.Resolve<IMyWcfServiceClient>() .Expect(x => x.BeginDoStuff(null, null, null)) .IgnoreArguments() .Do( new Func<Specification, AsyncCallback, object, IAsyncResult>((inData, asyncCallback, state) => { return new CompletedAsyncResult(asyncCallback, state); })); container.Resolve<IRepositoryServiceClient>() .Expect(x => x.EndRetrieveAttributeDefinitionsForSorting(null)) .IgnoreArguments() .Do( new Func<IAsyncResult, OutData>((ar) => { return someMockData; })); // act var target = CreateTestSubject(container); target.DoMethodThatInvokesService(); // Run the dispatcher for everything over background priority Dispatcher.CurrentDispatcher.Invoke(DispatcherPriority.Background, new Action(() => { })); // assert Assert.IsTrue(my operation ran as expected); } The problem that I see is that the code that I specified to run when the async action completed (in this case, Foo(x)), is never called. I can verify this by setting breakpoints in Foo and observing that they are never reached. Further, I can force a long delay after calling DoMethodThatInvokesService (which kicks off the async call), and the code is still never run. I do know that the lines of code invoking the Rx framework were called. Other things I've tried: I have attempted to modify the second last line according to the suggestions here: Reactive Extensions Rx - unit testing something with ObserveOnDispatcher No love. I have added .Take(1) to the Rx code as follows: func(inData).ObserveOnDispatcher().Take(1).Subscribe(x = Foo(x)); This improved my failure rate to something like 1 in 5, but they still occurred. I have rewritten the Rx code to use the plain jane Async pattern. This works, however my developer ego really would love to use Rx instead of boring old begin/end. In the end I do have a work around in hand (i.e. don't use Rx), however I feel that it is not ideal. If anyone has ran into this problem in the past and found a solution, I'd dearly love to hear it.

    Read the article

  • Visual Studio 2010 and TFS 2008: Building unit test projects

    - by Peter
    Hi, We are currently taking VS2010 for a testdrive and so far we are a little stumped with how it just won't cooperate with our existing Team Foundation Server 2008. We still have all our projects on .NET 3.5 and whenever we are now building a solution that contains a unit test project (which automatically builds in .NET 4.0) the TFS won't build it. The .NET 4.0 framework is installed on the TFS 2008. The error we're receiving is: [Any CPU/Release] c:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v3.5\Microsoft.Common.targets(0,0): warning MSB3245: Could not resolve this reference. Could not locate the assembly "Microsoft.VisualStudio.QualityTools.UnitTestFramework, Version=10.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a, processorArchitecture=MSIL". Check to make sure the assembly exists on disk. If this reference is required by your code, you may get compilation errors. As a temporary workaround we are now forced to remove all our test projects in order for our solutions to build.

    Read the article

  • Loading fixtures in django unit tests

    - by loder
    I'm trying to start writing unit tests for django and I'm having some questions about fixtures: I made a fixture of my whole project db (not certain application) and I want to load it for each test, because it looks like loading only the fixture for certain app won't be enough. I'd like to have the fixture stored in /proj_folder/fixtures/proj_fixture.json. I've set the FIXTURE_DIRS = ('/fixtures/',) in my settings.py. Then in my testcase I'm trying fixtures = ['proj_fixture.json'] but my fixtures don't load. How can this be solved? How to add the place for searching fixtures? In general, is it ok to load the fixture for the whole test_db for each test in each app (if it's quite small)? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How can I use Moose with Test::Class?

    - by rassie
    I'm currently refactoring a test suite built up by a colleague and would like to use Test::Class[::Most] while doing so. As I started I figured out I could really use a couple of Moose roles to decouple code a little bit. However, it seems it's not quite possible -- I'm getting error messages like this one: Prototype mismatch: sub My::Test::Class::Base::blessed: none vs ($) at /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/Sub/Exporter.pm line 896 So the question is: can I use Moose together with Test::Class and if so, how? PS: The code goes like this: package My::Test::Class::Base; use Moose; use Test::Class::Most; with 'My::Cool::Role'; has attr => ( ... );

    Read the article

  • Best practices for file system dependencies in unit/integration tests

    - by Olvagor
    I just started writing tests for a lot of code. There's a bunch of classes with dependencies to the file system, that is they read CSV files, read/write configuration files and so on. Currently the test files are stored in the test directory of the project (it's a Maven2 project) but for several reasons this directory doesn't always exist, so the tests fail. Do you know best practices for coping with file system dependencies in unit/integration tests? Edit: I'm not searching an answer for that specific problem I described above. That was just an example. I'd prefer general recommendations how to handle dependencies to the file system/databases etc.

    Read the article

  • How can I use Moose with Test::Class?

    - by rassie
    I'm currently refactoring a test suite built up by a colleague and would like to use Test::Class[::Most] while doing so. As I started I figured out I could really use a couple of Moose roles to decouple code a little bit. However, it seems it's not quite possible -- I'm getting error messages like this one: Prototype mismatch: sub My::Test::Class::Base::blessed: none vs ($) at /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.8.8/Sub/Exporter.pm line 896 So the question is: can I use Moose together with Test::Class and if so, how? PS: The code goes like this: package My::Test::Class::Base; use Moose; use Test::Class::Most; with 'My::Cool::Role'; has attr => ( ... );

    Read the article

  • iPHone: Unit/Logic Tests initWithNibName

    - by pion
    I have setup my Logic Tests following the instructions on http://developer.apple.com/iphone/library/documentation/Xcode/Conceptual/iphone_development/135-Unit_Testing_Applications/unit_testing_applications.html. I could test a couple classes successfully. But I got error when testing the following: - (id)init { if (self = [super initWithNibName:@"Foo" bundle:nil]) { ... } return self; } The error message is -[UIViewController _loadViewFromNibNamed:bundle:] was unable to load a nib named "Foo" My question: Did I do something wrong? Missed something? or I cannot test -initWithNibName using Logic Tests technique. Thanks in advance for your help.

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing Model Classes that inherit from NSManagedObject

    - by Matt Baker
    So...I'm trying to get unit tests set up in my iPhone App but I'm having some issues. I'm trying to test my model classes but they inherit directly from NSManagedObject. I'm sure this is a problem but I don't know how to get around it. Everything is building and running as expected but I get this error when calling any method on the class I'm testing: Unknown.m:0:0 unrecognized selector sent to instance 0xc2b120 If I follow this structure (http://chanson.livejournal.com/115621.html) to create my object in my tests I end up with another error entirely but it still doesn't help me. Basically my question is this: how can I test a class that inherits from NSManagedObject?

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing iPhone Code That Uses NSLocalizedString

    - by Jay Haase
    I have an iPhone iOS4.1 application that uses localized strings. I have just started building unit tests using the SenTestingKit. I have been able to successfully test many different types of values. I am unable to correctly test any of my code that uses NSLocalizedString calls, because when the code runs in my LogicTests target, all of my NSLocalizedString calls only return the string key. I have added my Localizable.strings file to the LogicTests target. My question is: How must I configure my LogicTests target so that calls to NSLocalizedString will return the localized string and not the string key.

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing Model Classes that derive from NSManagedObject

    - by Matt Baker
    So...I'm trying to get unit tests set up in my iPhone App but I'm having some issues. I'm trying to test my model classes but they inherit directly from NSManagedObject. I'm sure this is a problem but I don't know how to get around it. Everything is building and running as expected but I get this error when calling any method on the class I'm testing: Unknown.m:0:0 unrecognized selector sent to instance 0xc2b120 If I follow this structure (http://chanson.livejournal.com/115621.html) to create my object in my tests I end up with another error entirely but it still doesn't help me. Basically my question is this: how can I test a class that inherits from NSManagedObject?

    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 Model Classes that inherits from NSManagedObject

    - by Matt Baker
    So...I'm trying to get unit tests set up in my iPhone App but I'm having some issues. I'm trying to test my model classes but they inherit directly from NSManagedObject. I'm sure this is a problem but I don't know how to get around it. Everything is building and running as expected but I get this error when calling any method on the class I'm testing: Unknown.m:0:0 unrecognized selector sent to instance 0xc2b120 If I follow this structure (http://chanson.livejournal.com/115621.html) to create my object in my tests I end up with another error entirely but it still doesn't help me. Basically my question is this: how can I test a class that inherits from NSManagedObject?

    Read the article

  • Linker Error: iPhone Unit Test Bundle referencing App classes

    - by ohhorob
    Starting with an app already in development, I have carried out the instructions in the iPhone Development Guide – Unit Testing Applications I can successfully include and use my App's classes in Application-style tests that run on the device, and output their results to the console. If I add the following line of code: STAssertTrue([viewController isKindOfClass:[LoginViewController class]], @"Top view controller is not LoginViewController"); The following build error is generated: Undefined symbols: "_OBJC_CLASS_$_LoginViewController", referenced from: __objc_classrefs__DATA@0 in LoginViewTest.o ld: symbol(s) not found collect2: ld returned 1 exit status I can provide more configuration information for the project and the Testing target, but the setup works file without the [LoginViewController class] line in the test source. Without that line, I can reference the class, use it's properties and send it messages successfully. Is there a linking build setting, or bundle loading option that is required when attempting to use an App class in this fashion? Or should I find another type of test to confirm that the class of an object is the expected one?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31  | Next Page >