Search Results

Search found 9492 results on 380 pages for 'logic unit'.

Page 29/380 | < Previous Page | 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36  | Next Page >

  • C++ - Is it possible to implement memory leak testing in a unit test?

    - by sevaxx
    I'm trying to implement unit testing for my code and I'm having a hard time doing it. Ideally I would like to test some classes not only for good functionality but also for proper memory allocation/deallocation. I wonder if this check can be done using a unit testing framework. I am using Visual Assert btw. I would love to see some sample code , if possible !

    Read the article

  • Real world example of Unification in First Order Logic?

    - by Sebi
    I know this is only part of a programming question, but at the moment, I'm doing a little bit of logic programming. One thing I still don't understand correctly is Unification in First Order Logic. I read the Wikipedia article and it is more or less clear that the purpose is searching a term that unifies two sentences... There are also examples in this article but I just don't get the point why this should be useful. Can anyone give an example with real world objects instead of A, B, C,, etc.? I hope this will help me to understand. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Sneak peek at next generation Three MiFi unit – Huawei E585

    - by Liam Westley
    Last Wednesday I was fortunate to be invited to a sneak preview of the next generation Three MiFi unit, the Huawei E585. Many thanks to all those who posted questions both via this blog or via @westleyl on Twitter. I think I made sure I asked every question posed to the MiFi product manager from Three UK, and so here's the answers you were after. What is a MiFi? For those who are wondering, a MiFi unit is a 3G broadband modem combined with a WiFi access point, providing 3G broadband data access to up to five devices simultaneously via standard WiFi connections. What is different? It appears the prime task of enhancing the MiFi was to improve the user experience and user interface, both in terms of the device hardware and within the management software to configure the device.  I think this was a very sensible decision as these areas had substantial room for improvement. Single button operation to switch on, enable WiFi and connect to 3G Improved OELD display (see below), replacing the multi coloured LEDs; including signal strength, SMS notifications, the number of connected clients and data usage Management is via a web based dashboard accessible from any web browser. This is a big win for those running Linux, Mac OS/X, iPad users and, for me, as I can now configure the device from Windows 7 64-bit Charging is via micro USB, the new standard for small USB devices; you cannot use your old charger for the new MiFi unit Automatic reconnection when regaining a signal Improved charging time, which should allow recharging of the device when in use Although subjective, the black and silver design does look more classy than the silver and white plastic of the original MiFi What is the same? Virtually the same size and weight The battery is the same unit as the original MiFi so you’ll have a handy spare if you upgrade Data plans remain the same as the current MiFi, so cheapest price for upgraders will be £49 pay as you go Still only works on 3G networks, with no fallback to GPRS or EDGE There is no specific upgrade path for existing three customers, either from dongle or from the original MiFi My opinion I think three have concentrated on the correct areas of usability and user experience rather than trying to add new whizz bang technology features which aren’t of interest to mainstream users. The one button operation and the improved device display will make it much easier to use when out and about. If the automatic reconnection proves reliable that will remove a major bugbear that I experienced the previous evening when travelling on the First Great Western line from Paddington to Didcot Parkway.  The signal was repeatedly lost as we sped through tunnels and cuttings, and without automatic reconnection is was a real pain to keep pressing the data button on the MiFi to re-establish my data connection. And finally, the web based dashboard will mean I no longer need to resort to my XP based netbook to configure the SSID and password. My everyday laptop runs Windows 7 64-bit which appears to confuse the older 3 WiFi manager which cannot locate the MiFi when connected. Links to other sites, and other images of the device Good first impressions from Ben Smith, http://thereallymobileproject.com/2010/06/3uk-announce-a-new-mifi-with-a-screen/ Also, a round up of other sneak preview posts, http://www.3mobilebuzz.com/2010/06/11/mifi-round-two-your-view/ Pictures Here is a comparison of the old MiFi device next to the new device, complete with OLED display and the Huawei logo now being a prominent feature on the front of the device. One of my fellow bloggers had a Linux based netbook, showing off the web based dashboard complete with Text messages panel to manage SMS. And finally, I never thought that my blog sub title would ever end up printed onto a cup cake, ... and here's some of the other cup cakes ...

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing.... a data provider ?

    - by TomTom
    Given problem: I like unit tests. I develop connectivity software to external systems that pretty much and often use a C++ library The return of this systems is nonndeterministic. Data is received while running, but making sure it is all correctly interpreted is hard. How can I test this properly? I can run a unit test that does a connect. Sadly, it will then process a life data stream. I can say I run the test for 30 or 60 seconds before disconnecting, but getting code ccoverage is impossible - I simply dont even comeclose to get all code paths EVERY ONCE PER DAY (error code paths are rarely run). I also can not really assert every result. Depending on the time of the day we talk of 20.000 data callbacks per second - all of which are not relly determined good enough to validate each of them for consistency. Mocking? Well, that would leave me testing an empty shell of myself because the code handling the events basically is the to be tested case, and in many cases we talk here of a COMPLEX c level structure - hard to have mocking frameworks that integrate from Csharp to C++ Anyone any idea? I am short on giving up using unit tests for this part of the application.

    Read the article

  • Bad linking in Qt unit test -- missing the link to the moc file?

    - by dwj
    I'm trying to unit test a class that inherits QObject; the class itself is located up one level in my directory structure. When I build the unit test I get the standard unresolved errors if a class' MOC file cannot be found: test.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "public: virtual void * __thiscall UnitToTest::qt_metacast(char const *)" (?qt_metacast@UnitToTest@@UAEPAXPBD@Z) + 2 missing functions The MOC file is created but appears to not be linking. I've been poking around SO, the web, and Qt's docs for quite a while and have hit a wall. How do I get the unit test to include the MOC file in the link? ==== My project file is dead simple: TEMPLATE = app TARGET = test DESTDIR = . CONFIG += qtestlib INCLUDEPATH += . .. DEPENDPATH += . HEADERS += test.h SOURCES += test.cpp ../UnitToTest.cpp stubs.cpp DEFINES += UNIT_TEST My directory structure and files: C:. | UnitToTest.cpp | UnitToTest.h | \---test | test.cpp (Makefiles removed for clarity) | test.h | test.pro | stubs.cpp | +---debug | UnitToTest.obj | test.obj | test.pdb | moc_test.cpp | moc_test.obj | stubs.obj Edit: Additional information The generated Makefile.Debug shows the moc file missing: SOURCES = test.cpp \ ..\test.cpp \ stubs.cpp debug\moc_test.cpp OBJECTS = debug\test.obj \ debug\UnitToTest.obj \ debug\stubs.obj \ debug\moc_test.obj

    Read the article

  • Exposing business logic as WCF service

    - by Oren Schwartz
    I'm working on a middle-tier project which encapsulates the business logic (uses a DAL layer, and serves a web application server [ASP.net]) of a product deployed in a LAN. The BL serves as a bunch of services and data objects that are invoked upon user action. At present times, the DAL acts as a separate application whereas the BL uses it, but is consumed by the web application as a DLL. Both the DAL and the web application are deployed on different servers inside organization, and since the BL DLL is consumed by the web application, it resides in the same server. The worst thing about exposing the BL as a DLL is that we lost track with what we expose. Deployment is not such a big issue since mostly, product versions are deployed together. Would you recommend migrating from DLL to WCF service? If so, why? Do you know anyone who had a similar experience?

    Read the article

  • How to integrate game logic in game engines

    - by MahanGM
    Recently I'm working on a 2d game engine example in .Net with C#. My main problem is that I can't figure out how I should include the game logic within the game. Currently I have a base engine which is a set of classes that they are running sub-systems like Render, Sound, Input and Core functionality. There is an editor which helps the user to add resources, build levels, write scripts and other stuffs. I came up with an idea to use Reflection and CSharpCodeProvider from my editor to compile the written code. This way I can get an executable of my product too. This way is quite well but I would like to know what's really the solution and architecture to do this. My engine's role is 2d platform. The scripting language is C# right now because I can't consist any other embeddable language for now. The game needs compilation and CSharpCodeProvider is the only way for me to do it meantime.

    Read the article

  • Networking Client Server Packet logic (How they communicate)

    - by Trixmix
    I want to know what is the logic behind server client communication through packets for a real time game. for example the server sends x packets then the client receives x packets and processes them.. Basically what is the process to keep the client and server in sync and able to receive and send packets. more in depth example of what I want to know: client step 1 wait for a packet step 2 read x packets step 3 process x packets step 4 send x packets and so on... I need to know the very basic outline of the communication. Big questions are: 1) do I send and read packets all at one time? i.e for loop though the incoming packets array list and read them all or one every server loop or what... 2) what order should I do things i.e first receive then read then process then send etc.. 3) what I asked above a step by step of what the server / client should do.. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Logic in Entity Components Systems

    - by aaron
    I'm making a game that uses an Entity/Component architecture basically a port of Artemis's framework to c++,the problem arises when I try to make a PlayerControllerComponent, my original idea was this. class PlayerControllerComponent: Component { public: virtual void update() = 0; }; class FpsPlayerControllerComponent: PlayerControllerComponent { public: void update() { //handle input } }; and have a system that updates PlayerControllerComponents, but I found out that the artemis framework does not look at sub-classes the way I thought it would. So all in all my question here is should I make the framework aware of subclasses or should I add a new Component like object that is used for logic.

    Read the article

  • What use is a Business Logic Layer (BLL)?

    - by Andrew S. Arnold
    In reading up on good practice for database applications I've frequently come across advocates of so-called "business logic layers" and I'm trying to decide if it's best for my project to use one (it's a small personal project). My issue lies in the fact that I can't think of anything for the BLL to do that the DAL can't already handle (executing queries and mapping results to objects), so my BLL just calls the DAL without doing anything itself. Maybe I'm wrong about exactly what the DAL should be doing too. But regardless, what sorts of functionality should be expected of a BLL in a database management application?

    Read the article

  • SSIS 2008 Configuration Settings Handling Logic for Variables Visualized

    - by Compudicted
    There are many articles discussing the specifics of how the configuration settings are applied including the differences between SSIS 2005 and 2008 version implementations, however this topic keeps resurfacing on MSDN’s SSIS Forum. I thought it could be useful to cover the logic aspect visually. Below is a diagram explaining the basic flow of a variable setting for a case when no parent package is involved.   As you can see the run time stage ignores any command line flags for variables already set in the config file, I realize this is not stressed enough in many publications. Besides, another interesting fact is that the command line dtexec tool is case sensitive for the portion following the package keyword, I mean if you specify your flag to set a new value for a variable like dtexec /f Package.dtsx -set \package.variables[varPkgMyDate].value;02/01/2011 (notice the lover case v in .value) You will get errors. By capitalizing the keyword the package runs successfully.

    Read the article

  • What Counts for A DBA - Logic

    - by drsql
    "There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who will always wonder why there are only two items in my list and those who will figured it out the first time they saw this very old joke."  Those readers who will give up immediately and get frustrated with me for not explaining it to them are not likely going to be great technical professionals of any sort, much less a programmer or administrator who will be constantly dealing with the common failures that make up a DBA's day.  Many of these people will stare at this like a dog staring at a traffic signal and still have no more idea of how to decipher the riddle. Without explanation they will give up, call the joke "stupid" and, feeling quite superior, walk away indignantly to their job likely flipping patties of meat-by-product. As a data professional or any programmer who has strayed  to this very data-oriented blog, you would, if you are worth your weight in air, either have recognized immediately what was going on, or felt a bit ignorant.  Your friends are chuckling over the joke, but why is it funny? Unfortunately you left your smartphone at home on the dresser because you were up late last night programming and were running late to work (again), so you will either have to fake a laugh or figure it out.  Digging through the joke, you figure out that the word "two" is the most important part, since initially the joke mentioned 10. Hmm, why did they spell out two, but not ten? Maybe 10 could be interpreted a different way?  As a DBA, this sort of logic comes into play every day, and sometimes it doesn't involve nerdy riddles or Star Wars folklore.  When you turn on your computer and get the dreaded blue screen of death, you don't immediately cry to the help desk and sit on your thumbs and whine about not being able to work. Do that and your co-workers will question your nerd-hood; I know I certainly would. You figure out the problem, and when you have it narrowed down, you call the help desk and tell them what the problem is, usually having to explain that yes, you did in fact try to reboot before calling.  Of course, sometimes humility does come in to play when you reach the end of your abilities, but the ‘end of abilities’ is not something any of us recognize readily. It is handy to have the ability to use logic to solve uncommon problems: It becomes especially useful when you are trying to solve a data-related problem such as a query performance issue, and the way that you approach things will tell your coworkers a great deal about your abilities.  The novice is likely to immediately take the approach of  trying to add more indexes or blaming the hardware. As you become more and more experienced, it becomes increasingly obvious that performance issues are a very complex topic. A query may be slow for a myriad of reasons, from concurrency issues, a poor query plan because of a parameter value (like parameter sniffing,) poor coding standards, or just because it is a complex query that is going to be slow sometimes. Some queries that you will deal with may have twenty joins and hundreds of search criteria, and it can take a lot of thought to determine what is going on.  You can usually figure out the problem to almost any query by using basic knowledge of how joins and queries work, together with the help of such things as the query plan, profiler or monitoring tools.  It is not unlikely that it can take a full day’s work to understand some queries, breaking them down into smaller queries to find a very tiny problem. Not every time will you actually find the problem, and it is part of the process to occasionally admit that the problem is random, and everything works fine now.  Sometimes, it is necessary to realize that a problem is outside of your current knowledge, and admit temporary defeat: You can, at least, narrow down the source of the problem by looking logically at all of the possible solutions. By doing this, you can satisfy your curiosity and learn more about what the actual problem was. For example, in the joke, had you never been exposed to the concept of binary numbers, there is no way you could have known that binary - 10 = decimal - 2, but you could have logically come to the conclusion that 10 must not mean ten in the context of the joke, and at that point you are that much closer to getting the joke and at least won't feel so ignorant.

    Read the article

  • How to design console application with good seperation of UI from Logic

    - by JavaSa
    Is it considered an overkill for console application to be design like MVC , MVP or N tier architecture? If not which is more common and if you can link me to simple example of it. I want to implement a tic tac toe game in console application. I have a solution which hold two projects: TicTacToeBusinessLogic (Class library project) and TicTacToeConsoleApplication (Console application project) to represent the view logic. In the TicTacToeConsoleApplication I've Program.cs class which holds the main entry point (public static void Main). Now I face a problem. I want the game to handle its own game flow so I can: Create new GameManager class (from BL) but this causing the view to directly know the BL part. So I'm a little confused how to write it in an acceptable way. Should I use delegates? Please show me a simple example.

    Read the article

  • Testing controller logic that uses ISession directly

    - by Rippo
    I have just read this blog post from Jimmy Bogard and was drawn to this comment. Where this falls down is when a component doesn’t support a given layering/architecture. But even with NHibernate, I just use the ISession directly in the controller action these days. Why make things complicated? I then commented on the post and ask this question:- My question here is what options would you have testing the controller logic IF you do not mock out the NHibernate ISession. I am curious what options we have if we utilise the ISession directly on the controller?

    Read the article

  • Logic in Entity Components Sytems

    - by aaron
    I'm making a game that uses an Entity/Component architecture basically a port of Artemis's framework to c++,the problem arises when I try to make a PlayerControllerComponent, my original idea was this. class PlayerControllerComponent: Component { public: virtual void update() = 0; }; class FpsPlayerControllerComponent: PlayerControllerComponent { public: void update() { //handle input } }; and have a system that updates PlayerControllerComponents, but I found out that the artemis framework does not look at sub-classes the way I thought it would. So all in all my question here is should I make the framework aware of subclasses or should I add a new Component like object that is used for logic.

    Read the article

  • Is there a repository of game logic algorithms?

    - by New2This
    I'm writing my first 2D game, and I'm writing some tracking logic for the computer enemies. Basic follow-the-player tracking was easy, but ineffectual. Too easy to escape. So I'm trying to implement some more sophisticated flanking and other tactics, and (as expected) it's pretty tricky. This is a topic I know nothing about. I'm going to keep trying, but it'd be awesome to have some examples or tips to work off of. Is there any place that has a decent set of pseudocode AI algorithms, or tips or advice on the subject, e.g. for 2D tracking?

    Read the article

  • Get/Post Controller Logic Best Practice

    - by Brian Mains
    In an ASP.NET MVC project (Razor), I have a Get request, which loads two properties on a model, dependent on the property passed into the action method. So if the parameter has a value, the Group property is supplied data. But if not, the Groups collection property is supplied data. In the post action method, when I process the data, to repopulate the view, I have to provide similar logic, and could getaway with returning Action(param) (the get response) to the caller. My question is, based on experience, is that a good practice to get into? I see some downsides to doing that, but adds the lack of code redundancy. Or is there a better alternative?

    Read the article

  • Logic - Time measurement

    - by user73384
    To measure the following for tasks- Last execution time and maximum execution time for each task. CPU load/time consumed by each task over a defined period informed by application at run time. Maximum CPU load consumed by each task. Tasks have following characteristics- First task runs as background – Event information for entering only Second task - periodic – Event information for entering and exiting from task Third task is interrupt , can start any time – no information available from this task Forth task highest priority interrupt , can start any time – Event information for entering and exiting from task Should use least possible execution time and memory. 32bit increment timer available for time counting. Lets prepare and discuss the logic, It’s OK to have limitations …! Questions on understanding problem statement are welcome

    Read the article

  • Identifier for the “completed” stage of a process: 0, 99, something else?

    - by Arnold Sakhnov
    Say, that you are handling a multi-step process (like a complex registration form, with a number of steps the user has go through in order). You need to be able to save the current state of the process (e.g. so the user can come back to that registration form later and continue form the step where they were left off). Obviously, you’ll probably want to give each “step” an identifier you can refer to: 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. You logic will check for this step_id (or whatever you call it) to render the appropriate data. The question: how would you identify the stage after the final step, like the completed registration state (say, that you have to give that last “step” its own id, that’s how your logic is structured). Would it be a 0, 999, a non-integer value, something else entirely?

    Read the article

  • Is your test method self-validating ?

    - by mehfuzh
    Writing state of art unit tests that can validate your every part of the framework is challenging and interesting at the same time, its like becoming a samurai. One of the key concept in this is to keep our test synced all the time as underlying code changes and thus breaking them to the furthest unit as possible.  This also means, we should avoid  multiple conditions embedded in a single test. Let’s consider the following example of transfer funds. [Fact] public void ShouldAssertTranserFunds() {     var currencyService = Mock.Create<ICurrencyService>();     //// current rate     Mock.Arrange(() => currencyService.GetConversionRate("AUS", "CAD")).Returns(0.88f);       Account to = new Account { Currency = "AUS", Balance = 120 };     Account from = new Account { Currency = "CAD" };       AccountService accService = new AccountService(currencyService);       Assert.Throws<InvalidOperationException>(() => accService.TranferFunds(to, from, 200f));       accService.TranferFunds(to, from, 100f);       Assert.Equal(from.Balance, 88);     Assert.Equal(20, to.Balance); } At first look,  it seems ok but as you look more closely , it is actually doing two tasks in one test. At line# 10 it is trying to validate the exception for invalid fund transfer and finally it is asserting if the currency conversion is successfully made. Here, the name of the test itself is pretty vague. The first rule for writing unit test should always reflect to inner working of the target code, where just by looking at their names it is self explanatory. Having a obscure name for a test method not only increase the chances of cluttering the test code, but it also gives the opportunity to add multiple paths into it and eventually makes things messy as possible. I would rater have two test methods that explicitly describes its intent and are more self-validating. ShouldThrowExceptionForInvalidTransferOperation ShouldAssertTransferForExpectedConversionRate Having, this type of breakdown also helps us pin-point reported bugs easily rather wasting any time on debugging for something more general and can minimize confusion among team members. Finally, we should always make our test F.I.R.S.T ( Fast.Independent.Repeatable.Self-validating.Timely) [ Bob martin – Clean Code]. Only this will be enough to ensure, our test is as simple and clean as possible.   Hope that helps

    Read the article

  • Gradual approaches to dependency injection

    - by JW01
    I'm working on making my classes unit-testable, using dependency injection. But some of these classes have a lot of clients, and I'm not ready to refactor all of them to start passing in the dependencies yet. So I'm trying to do it gradually; keeping the default dependencies for now, but allowing them to be overridden for testing. One approach I'm conisdering is just moving all the "new" calls into their own methods, e.g.: public MyObject createMyObject(args) { return new MyObject(args); } Then in my unit tests, I can just subclass this class, and override the create functions, so they create fake objects instead. Is this a good approach? Are there any disadvantages? More generally, is it okay to have hard-coded dependencies, as long as you can replace them for testing? I know the preferred approach is to explicitly require them in the constructor, and I'd like to get there eventually. But I'm wondering if this is a good first step.

    Read the article

  • Differences between software testing processes and techniques?

    - by Aptos
    I get confused between these terms. For examples, should Unit testing be listed as a software testing process or technique? I think unit testing is a software testing technique. And how about Test driven development? Can you give me some examples for software testing processes and techniques? In my opinion, software testing process is a part of the software development life cycle. For example, if we use V-Model, the software testing process will be System test, Acceptance test, Integration Test... Thank you.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36  | Next Page >