Search Results

Search found 5214 results on 209 pages for 'j unit 122'.

Page 28/209 | < Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >

  • How do I unit test the methods in a method object?

    - by Sancho
    I've performed the "Replace Method with Method Object" refactoring described by Beck. Now, I have a class with a "run()" method and a bunch of member functions that decompose the computation into smaller units. How do I test those member functions? My first idea is that my unit tests be basically copies of the "run()" method (with different initializations), but with assertions between each call to the member functions to check the state of the computation. (I'm using Python and the unittest module.)

    Read the article

  • How do I fix my Unit Test to have global access to everything?

    - by SLC
    Usually when you add one (in Visual Basic), it pops up a message asking if you want to enable an option that lets the test access things like private methods etc. However, I am editing a solution that does not have this enabled. I'd like to enable it so my unit tests will work, but I can't find the setting. Can anyone tell me how to enable it after the project has been created?

    Read the article

  • how can protected members of base class be accessed during unit test?

    - by amateur
    I am creating a unit test in mstest with rhino mocks. I have a class A that inherits class B. I am testing class A and create an instance of it for my test. The class it inherits, "B", has some protected methods and protected properties that I would like to access for the benefit of my tests. For example, validate that a protected property on my base class has the expected value. Any ideas how I might access these protected properties of class B during my test?

    Read the article

  • AgUnit - Silverlight unit testing with ReSharper

    - by koevoeter
    If you’re a ReSharper user and Silverlight 4 developer you’ll probably like this add-in that two of my co-workers created. It lets you run your Silverlight unit tests inside the Visual Studio IDE. You can get the add-in from Codeplex: http://agunit.codeplex.com/ (requires ReSharper 5 and Silverlight 4)

    Read the article

  • Should we exclude code for the code coverage analysis?

    - by romaintaz
    I'm working on several applications, mainly legacy ones. Currently, their code coverage is quite low: generally between 10 and 50%. Since several weeks, we have recurrent discussions with the Bangalore teams (main part of the development is made offshore in India) regarding the exclusions of packages or classes for Cobertura (our code coverage tool, even if we are currently migrating to JaCoCo). Their point of view is the following: as they will not write any unit tests on some layers of the application (1), these layers should be simply excluded from the code coverage measure. In others words, they want to limit the code coverage measure to the code that is tested or should be tested. Also, when they work on unit test for a complex class, the benefits - purely in term of code coverage - will be unnoticed due in a large application. Reducing the scope of the code coverage will make this kind of effort more visible... The interest of this approach is that we will have a code coverage measure that indicates the current status of the part of the application we consider as testable. However, my point of view is that we are somehow faking the figures. This solution is an easy way to reach higher level of code coverage without any effort. Another point that bothers me is the following: if we show a coverage increase from one week to another, how can we tell if this good news is due to the good work of the developers, or simply due to new exclusions? In addition, we will not be able to know exactly what is considered in the code coverage measure. For example, if I have a 10,000 lines of code application with 40% of code coverage, I can deduct that 40% of my code base is tested (2). But what happen if we set exclusions? If the code coverage is now 60%, what can I deduct exactly? That 60% of my "important" code base is tested? How can I As far as I am concerned, I prefer to keep the "real" code coverage value, even if we can't be cheerful about it. In addition, thanks to Sonar, we can easily navigate in our code base and know, for any module / package / class, its own code coverage. But of course, the global code coverage will still be low. What is your opinion on that subject? How do you do on your projects? Thanks. (1) These layers are generally related to the UI / Java beans, etc. (2) I know that's not true. In fact, it only means that 40% of my code base

    Read the article

  • Test interface implementation

    - by Michael
    I have a interface in our code base that I would like to be able to mock out for unit testing. I am writing a test implementation to allow the individual tests to be able to override the specific methods they are concerned with rather than implementing every method. I've run into a quandary over how the test implementation should behave if the test fails to override a method used by the method under test. Should I return a "non-value" (0, null) in the test implementation or throw a UnsupportedOperationException to explicitly fail the test?

    Read the article

  • Link between tests and user stories

    - by Sardathrion
    I have not see these links explicitly stated in the Agile literature I have read. So, I was wondering if this approach was correct: Let a story be defined as "In order to [RESULT], [ROLE] needs to [ACTION]" then RESULT generates system tests. ROLE generates acceptance tests. ACTION generates component and unit tests. Where the definitions are the ones used in xUnit Patterns which to be fair are fairly standard. Is this a correct interpretation or did I misunderstand something?

    Read the article

  • When you should and should not use the 'new' keyword?

    - by skizeey
    I watched a Google Tech Talk presentation on Unit Testing, given by Misko Hevery, and he said to avoid using the new keyword in business logic code. I wrote a program, and I did end up using the new keyword here and there, but they were mostly for instantiating objects that hold data (ie, they didn't have any functions or methods). I'm wondering, did I do something wrong when I used the new keyword for my program. And where can we break that 'rule'?

    Read the article

  • Returning JsonResult From ASP.NET MVC 2.0 Controller and Unit Testing

    This post will show how to return a simple Json result from an ASP.NET MVC 2.0 web project.  It will show how to test that result inside a unit test and essentially pick apart the Json, just like a JavaScript (or other client) would do.  It seems like it should be very simple (and indeed, [...]...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • ISO 12207: Verification of integration and Unit test validation

    - by user970696
    I have received comments from the supervisor reviewing my thesis. He asked two questions I cannot answer right now: If ISO 12207 says under "Integration verification" that it "checks that components are correctly and completely integrated into a system", how this can be verified without testing, if all testing is validation? How without testing can I know that system is integrated correctly and fully? If unit testing is validation, how does it match the ISO definiton of validation "that requirements for intended use were fulfilled" if its so low level?

    Read the article

  • Has test driven development (TDD) actually benefited a real world project?

    - by James
    I am not new to coding. I have been coding (seriously) for over 15 years now. I have always had some testing for my code. However, over the last few months I have been learning test driven design/development (TDD) using Ruby on Rails. So far, I'm not seeing the benefit. I see some benefit to writing tests for some things, but very few. And while I like the idea of writing the test first, I find I spend substantially more time trying to debug my tests to get them to say what I really mean than I do debugging actual code. This is probably because the test code is often substantially more complicated than the code it tests. I hope this is just inexperience with the available tools (RSpec in this case). I must say though, at this point, the level of frustration mixed with the disappointing lack of performance is beyond unacceptable. So far, the only value I'm seeing from TDD is a growing library of RSpec files that serve as templates for other projects/files. Which is not much more useful, maybe less useful, than the actual project code files. In reading the available literature, I notice that TDD seems to be a massive time sink up front, but pays off in the end. I'm just wondering, are there any real world examples? Does this massive frustration ever pay off in the real world? I really hope I did not miss this question somewhere else on here. I searched, but all the questions/answers are several years old at this point. It was a rare occasion when I found a developer who would say anything bad about TDD, which is why I have spent as much time on this as I have. However, I noticed that nobody seems to point to specific real-world examples. I did read one answer that said the guy debugging the code in 2011 would thank you for have a complete unit testing suite (I think that comment was made in 2008). So, I'm just wondering, after all these years, do we finally have any examples showing the payoff is real? Has anybody actually inherited or gone back to code that was designed/developed with TDD and has a complete set of unit tests and actually felt a payoff? Or did you find that you were spending so much time trying to figure out what the test was testing (and why it was important) that you just tossed out the whole mess and dug into the code?

    Read the article

  • NUnit SetUp and TearDown

    - by Lijo
    I have some experience in MS Test but new to NUnit. Whether NUnit [Setup] is corresponding to [ClassInitialize] or [TestInitialize] in MS Test? What is the NUnit attribute corresponding to [TestInitialize]? REFERENCE: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1873191/testinitialize-gets-fired-for-every-test-in-my-visual-studio-unit-tests http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4602288/nunit-testcontext-currentcontext-test-not-working

    Read the article

  • Economist Intelligence Unit to Present Preliminary Survey Findings at OHUG

    - by Jay Richey, HCM Product Marketing
    Oracle and IBM are sponsoring a luncheon at OHUG in Las Vegas for an exclusive preview of the forthcoming C-level perspectives of HR function: An Economist Intelligence Unit research program sponsored by IBM and Oracle. Speaking will be Economist Editor, Thought Leadership, Gilda Stahl, who will provide a preview of the study's findings and insights into whether CHROs are playing a central role in aligning companies' talent strategies with long term business goals, and how technology innovation can help Seating for this event is limited. Please register asap. http://www.oraclepartnerevent.com/2012/c-level-perspectives/

    Read the article

  • .NET processing unit [closed]

    - by configurator
    Do you think we'll ever see an IL (or other bytecode) processing unit? It sounds possible and would have a major benefit, because we wouldn't need the JITter. This isn't the same as compiling .NET directly to machine code, since the bytecode here is designed to be programmed and disassembled easily, unlike the bytecode used in x86 processors which is designed to work faster. What's stopping Intel (for example) from partnering with Microsoft and making such a .NET-optimised processor?

    Read the article

  • First TDD, Simple 2-tier C# Project - what do I unit test?

    - by Joel
    This is probably a stupid question but my googling isn't finding a satisfactory answer. I'm starting a small project in C#, with just a business layer and a data access layer - strangely, the UI will come later, and I have very little (read:no) concept / control over what it will look like. I would like to try TDD for this project. I'm using Visual Studio 2008 (soon to be 2010), I have ReSharper 5, and nUnit. Again, I want to do Test-Driven Development, but not necessarily the entire XP system. My question is - when and where do I write the first unit test? Do I only test logic before I write it, or do I test everything? It seems counter-productive to test things that have no reason to fail (auto-properties, empty constructors)...but it seems like the "No new code without a failing test" maxim requires this. Links or references are fine (but preferably to online resources, not books - I would like to get started ASAP). Thanks in advance for any guidance!

    Read the article

  • In a Rails unit test, how can I get a User fixture to load its associated Profile?

    - by MikeJ
    In the documentation concerning Fixtures (http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/Fixtures.html) they provide the following example of using label references for associations: ### in pirates.yml reginald: name: Reginald the Pirate monkey: george ### in monkeys.yml george: name: George the Monkey pirate: reginald So following their lead, I have a User model that has_one :profile, a Profile model that belongs_to :user, and tried to set up fixtures per their example: ### in users.yml reginald: id: 1 login: reginald ### in profiles.yml reginalds_profile: id: 1 name: Reginald the Pirate user: reginald (Note: since my association is one-way, the User fixture doesn't have a "profile: reginalds_profile" association--putting it in causes an error because the SQL table has no profile_id attribute.) The problem is, in my unit tests everything seems to load correctly, but users(:reginald).profile is always nil. What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • Using reflection to change static final File.separatorChar for unit testing?

    - by Stefan Kendall
    Specifically, I'm trying to create a unit test for a method which requires uses File.separatorChar to build paths on windows and unix. The code must run on both platforms, and yet I get errors with JUnit when I attempt to change this static final field. Anyone have any idea what's going on? Field field = java.io.File.class.getDeclaredField( "separatorChar" ); field.setAccessible(true); field.setChar(java.io.File.class,'/'); When I do this, I get IllegalAccessException: Can not set static final char field java.io.File.separatorChar to java.lang.Character Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • How do you create a unit-testing stub for an interface containing a read-only member?

    - by Robert Harvey
    I am writing some unit tests for an extension method I have written on IPrincipal. To assist, I have created a couple of helper classes (some code for not-implemented members of the interfaces has been omitted for brevity): public class IPrincipalStub : IPrincipal { private IIdentity identityStub = new IIdentityStub(); public IIdentity Identity { get { return identityStub } set { identityStub = value } } } public class IIdentityStub : IIdentity { public string Name { get; set; } } However, the Name property in the IIdentity interface is read-only (the IIDentity interface specifies a getter but not a setter for the Name property). How can I set the Name property in my stub object for testing purposes if the interface has defined it as a read-only property?

    Read the article

  • Is unit testing the definition of an interface necessary?

    - by HackedByChinese
    I have occasionally heard or read about people asserting their interfaces in a unit test. I don't mean mocking an interface for use in another type's test, but specifically creating a test to accompany the interface. Consider this ultra-lame and off-the-cuff example: public interface IDoSomething { string DoSomething(); } and the test: [TestFixture] public class IDoSomethingTests { [Test] public void DoSomething_Should_Return_Value() { var mock = new Mock<IDoSomething>(); var actualValue = mock.Expect(m => m.DoSomething()).Returns("value"); mock.Object.DoSomething(); mock.Verify(m => DoSomething()); Assert.AreEqual("value", actualValue); } } I suppose the idea is to use the test to drive the design of the interface and also to provide guidance for implementors on what's expected so they can draw good tests of their own. Is this a common (recommended) practice?

    Read the article

  • How to unit test internals (organization) of a data structure?

    - by Herms
    I've started working on a little ruby project that will have sample implementations of a number of different data structures and algorithms. Right now it's just for me to refresh on stuff I haven't done for a while, but I'm hoping to have it set up kind of like Ruby Koans, with a bunch of unit tests written for the data structures but the implementations empty (with full implementations in another branch). It could then be used as a nice learning tool or code kata. However, I'm having trouble coming up with a good way to write the tests. I can't just test the public behavior as that won't necessarily tell me about the implementation, and that's kind of important here. For example, the public interfaces of a normal BST and a Red-Black tree would be the same, but the RB Tree has very specific data organization requirements. How would I test that?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >