Search Results

Search found 6281 results on 252 pages for 'automated tests'.

Page 3/252 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 | Next Page >

Recording object method calls to generate automated test.

- by Constantin

I have an object with large interface and I would like to record all its method calls done during a user session. Ideally this sequence of calls would be available as source code: myobj.MethodA(42); myobj.MethodB("spam", false); ... I would then convert this code to a test case to have a kind of automated smoke/load test. WCF Load Test can do this for WCF services and CodedUI test recorder can do this for UIs. What are my options for a POCO class? I am in position to edit application code and replace the object in question with some recording/forwarding proxy.

Read the article
Automated user testing with times

- by Sean

I am attempting to test user interaction with an off the shelf product. The current process is to run through a manual script and record how long certain processes take to populate data, it may populate a datagrid, a tree, a list box, etc... It will also need to be able record how long it takes to generate a pdf report. We do not require extremely accurate time just to the nearest second or less than a second. I need to know if there is a simple Automated testing product that will handle the above criteria.

Read the article
Where should Acceptance tests be written against?

- by Jonn

I'm starting to get into writing automated Acceptance tests and I'm quite confused where to write these tests against, specifically what layer in the app. Most examples I've seen are Acceptance tests written against the Domain but how about tests like: Given Incorrect Data When the user submits the form Then Play an Error Beep These seem to be fit for the UI and not for the Domain, or probably even the Service layer.

Read the article
Seeking recommendations on automated test framework for C

- by Hissohathair

I'm writing some code (some of which uses W3C's libwww) in C. It's been a while since I've touched ANSI C. Back in the day we rolled our own test framework. Does anybody here have any test frameworks that they recommend for C programming? Googling around I was inclined to go with Check. It has a page on other unit testing frameworks in C, a few of which I've taken a quick look at. GNU AutoUnit seemed like it might be a good choice since I'm using the GNU build tools (autoconf, automake) but it doesn't look that alive... Another option would be to use a C++ framework and just write my tests in C++ Anyway, any experienced opinions would be appreciated. Thanks.

Read the article
Automated UAT/functional tests on Swing applications without source code

- by jas

Our team is now working on a big Swing application. Our job basically focuses on writing extensions to the existing framework. A typical job would be adding a new panel/ or adding a new tab with some extra functionalities that suit our need. It seems FEST can help a lot in terms of unit-test our code. I am going to try it out this week. But the question here is if there is a way to do automated functional testing on the whole application. In another word, we do not only need to test our code but also the framework. After all, UAT is the most important part. I am currently considering decompiling the jar files we got into source code then we can identify the components and then use FEST. So, before I get started to give this approach a shot, I think I just ask for ideas and inspirations here. There must be people who have done similar things before. Would be nice if I could learn from the veterans who fought against this before . Thanks,

Read the article
Facebook rend open source Ringmark, sa suite de tests pour applications Web mobiles, plus de 400 tests disponibles

Facebook rend open source Ringmark sa suite de tests pour applications Web mobiles, plus de 400 tests disponibles Facebook a publié sous une licence open source le code de Ringmark, une suite de tests pour les navigateurs mobiles pour la création d'applications mobiles Web. Ringmark avait été présenté pour la première fois il y a quelques semaines lors de l'événement Mobile World Congres de Barcelone. L'outil est conçu pour fournir aux développeurs des fonctionnalités de tests de base qu'ils ont besoin pour construire des applications Web mobiles conformes aux standards. La suite de tests va aider ceux-ci à mieux comprendre comment les navigateurs mobiles prennent en charge...

Read the article
Writing the tests for FluentPath

- by Bertrand Le Roy

Writing the tests for FluentPath is a challenge. The library is a wrapper around a legacy API (System.IO) that wasn’t designed to be easily testable. If it were more testable, the sensible testing methodology would be to tell System.IO to act against a mock file system, which would enable me to verify that my code is doing the expected file system operations without having to manipulate the actual, physical file system: what we are testing here is FluentPath, not System.IO. Unfortunately, that is not an option as nothing in System.IO enables us to plug a mock file system in. As a consequence, we are left with few options. A few people have suggested me to abstract my calls to System.IO away so that I could tell FluentPath – not System.IO – to use a mock instead of the real thing. That in turn is getting a little silly: FluentPath already is a thin abstraction around System.IO, so layering another abstraction between them would double the test surface while bringing little or no value. I would have to test that new abstraction layer, and that would bring us back to square one. Unless I’m missing something, the only option I have here is to bite the bullet and test against the real file system. Of course, the tests that do that can hardly be called unit tests. They are more integration tests as they don’t only test bits of my code. They really test the successful integration of my code with the underlying System.IO. In order to write such tests, the techniques of BDD work particularly well as they enable you to express scenarios in natural language, from which test code is generated. Integration tests are being better expressed as scenarios orchestrating a few basic behaviors, so this is a nice fit. The Orchard team has been successfully using SpecFlow for integration tests for a while and I thought it was pretty cool so that’s what I decided to use. Consider for example the following scenario: Scenario: Change extension Given a clean test directory When I change the extension of bar\notes.txt to foo Then bar\notes.txt should not exist And bar\notes.foo should exist This is human readable and tells you everything you need to know about what you’re testing, but it is also executable code. What happens when SpecFlow compiles this scenario is that it executes a bunch of regular expressions that identify the known Given (set-up phases), When (actions) and Then (result assertions) to identify the code to run, which is then translated into calls into the appropriate methods. Nothing magical. Here is the code generated by SpecFlow: [NUnit.Framework.TestAttribute()] [NUnit.Framework.DescriptionAttribute("Change extension")] public virtual void ChangeExtension() { TechTalk.SpecFlow.ScenarioInfo scenarioInfo = new TechTalk.SpecFlow.ScenarioInfo("Change extension", ((string[])(null))); #line 6 this.ScenarioSetup(scenarioInfo); #line 7 testRunner.Given("a clean test directory"); #line 8 testRunner.When("I change the extension of " + "bar\\notes.txt to foo"); #line 9 testRunner.Then("bar\\notes.txt should not exist"); #line 10 testRunner.And("bar\\notes.foo should exist"); #line hidden testRunner.CollectScenarioErrors();} The #line directives are there to give clues to the debugger, because yes, you can put breakpoints into a scenario: The way you usually write tests with SpecFlow is that you write the scenario first, let it fail, then write the translation of your Given, When and Then into code if they don’t already exist, which results in running but failing tests, and then you write the code to make your tests pass (you implement the scenario). In the case of FluentPath, I built a simple Given method that builds a simple file hierarchy in a temporary directory that all scenarios are going to work with: [Given("a clean test directory")] public void GivenACleanDirectory() { _path = new Path(SystemIO.Path.GetTempPath()) .CreateSubDirectory("FluentPathSpecs") .MakeCurrent(); _path.GetFileSystemEntries() .Delete(true); _path.CreateFile("foo.txt", "This is a text file named foo."); var bar = _path.CreateSubDirectory("bar"); bar.CreateFile("baz.txt", "bar baz") .SetLastWriteTime(DateTime.Now.AddSeconds(-2)); bar.CreateFile("notes.txt", "This is a text file containing notes."); var barbar = bar.CreateSubDirectory("bar"); barbar.CreateFile("deep.txt", "Deep thoughts"); var sub = _path.CreateSubDirectory("sub"); sub.CreateSubDirectory("subsub"); sub.CreateFile("baz.txt", "sub baz") .SetLastWriteTime(DateTime.Now); sub.CreateFile("binary.bin", new byte[] {0x00, 0x01, 0x02, 0x03, 0x04, 0x05, 0xFF}); } Then, to implement the scenario that you can read above, I had to write the following When: [When("I change the extension of (.*) to (.*)")] public void WhenIChangeTheExtension( string path, string newExtension) { var oldPath = Path.Current.Combine(path.Split('\\')); oldPath.Move(p => p.ChangeExtension(newExtension)); } As you can see, the When attribute is specifying the regular expression that will enable the SpecFlow engine to recognize what When method to call and also how to map its parameters. For our scenario, “bar\notes.txt” will get mapped to the path parameter, and “foo” to the newExtension parameter. And of course, the code that verifies the assumptions of the scenario: [Then("(.*) should exist")] public void ThenEntryShouldExist(string path) { Assert.IsTrue(_path.Combine(path.Split('\\')).Exists); } [Then("(.*) should not exist")] public void ThenEntryShouldNotExist(string path) { Assert.IsFalse(_path.Combine(path.Split('\\')).Exists); } These steps should be written with reusability in mind. They are building blocks for your scenarios, not implementation of a specific scenario. Think small and fine-grained. In the case of the above steps, I could reuse each of those steps in other scenarios. Those tests are easy to write and easier to read, which means that they also constitute a form of documentation. Oh, and SpecFlow is just one way to do this. Rob wrote a long time ago about this sort of thing (but using a different framework) and I highly recommend this post if I somehow managed to pique your interest: http://blog.wekeroad.com/blog/make-bdd-your-bff-2/ And this screencast (Rob always makes excellent screencasts): http://blog.wekeroad.com/mvc-storefront/kona-3/ (click the “Download it here” link)

Read the article
VS 2010 Coded UI Test - Launch Referenced Application

- by Cory

I'm using Visuial Studio's Coded UI Tests to run Automated UI tests on a WPF Application everytime a build runs on my TFS server. The problem I am running into is dynamically launching the executable based on the path where it was just built to, including the configuration(x86, x64). Is there any way to get the path to an executable in a referenced project so that I can launch the application dynamically from my test project?

Read the article
Oracle 64-bit assembly throws BadImageFormatException when running unit tests

- by pjohnson

We recently upgraded to the 64-bit Oracle client. Since then, Visual Studio 2010 unit tests that hit the database (I know, unit tests shouldn't hit the database--they're not perfect) all fail with this error message:Test method MyProject.Test.SomeTest threw exception: System.Reflection.TargetInvocationException: Exception has been thrown by the target of an invocation. ---> System.BadImageFormatException: Could not load file or assembly 'Oracle.DataAccess, Version=4.112.3.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=89b483f429c47342' or one of its dependencies. An attempt was made to load a program with an incorrect format.I resolved this by changing the test settings to run tests in 64-bit. From the Test menu, go to Edit Test Settings, and pick your settings file. Go to Hosts, and change the "Run tests in 32 bit or 64 bit process" dropdown to "Run tests in 64 bit process on 64 bit machine". Now your tests should run.This fix makes me a little nervous. Visual Studio 2010 and earlier seem to change that file for no apparent reason, add more settings files, etc. If you're not paying attention, you could have TestSettings1.testsettings through TestSettings99.testsettings sitting there and never notice the difference. So it's worth making a note of how to change it in case you have to redo it, and being vigilant about files VS tries to add.I'm not entirely clear on why this was even a problem. Isn't that the point of an MSIL assembly, that it's not specific to the hardware it runs on? An IL disassembler can open the Oracle.DataAccess.dll in question, and in its Runtime property, I see the value "v4.0.30319 / x64". So I guess the assembly was specifically build to target 64-bit platforms only, possibly due to a 64-bit-specific difference in the external Oracle client upon which it depends. Most other assemblies, especially in the .NET Framework, list "msil", and a couple list "x86". So I guess this is another entry in the long list of ways Oracle refuses to play nice with Windows and .NET.If this doesn't solve your problem, you can read others' research into this error, and where to change the same test setting in Visual Studio 2012.

Read the article
How to test the tests?

- by Ryszard Szopa

We test our code to make it more correct (actually, less likely to be incorrect). However, the tests are also code -- they can also contain errors. And if your tests are buggy, they hardly make your code better. I can think of three possible types of errors in tests: Logical errors, when the programmer misunderstood the task at hand, and the tests do what he thought they should do, which is wrong; Errors in the underlying testing framework (eg. a leaky mocking abstraction); Bugs in the tests: the test is doing slightly different than what the programmer thinks it is. Type (1) errors seem to be impossible to prevent (unless the programmer just... gets smarter). However, (2) and (3) may be tractable. How do you deal with these types of errors? Do you have any special strategies to avoid them? For example, do you write some special "empty" tests, that only check the test author's presuppositions? Also, how do you approach debugging a broken test case?

Read the article
How do you write your QTP Tests?

- by Josh Harris

I am experimenting with using QTP for some webapp ui automation testing and I was wondering how people usually write their QTP tests. Do you use the object map, descriptive programming, a combination or some other way all together? Any little code example would be appreciated, Thank you

Read the article
How to migrate Cppunit tests into GoogleTest ?

- by blz

I have a bunch of module tests written in CPPunit with some mocks created by hand. I am looking for a way to migrate them to GoogleTest as smoothly as possible. Have you tried such an operation? What was the effort needed?

Read the article
Automating Solaris 11 Zones Installation Using The Automated Install Server

- by Orgad Kimchi

Introduction How to use the Oracle Solaris 11 Automated install server in order to automate the Solaris 11 Zones installation. In this document I will demonstrate how to setup the Automated Install server in order to provide hands off installation process for the Global Zone and two Non Global Zones located on the same system. Architecture layout: Figure 1. Architecture layout Prerequisite Setup the Automated install server (AI) using the following instructions “How to Set Up Automated Installation Services for Oracle Solaris 11” The first step in this setup will be creating two Solaris 11 Zones configuration files. Step 1: Create the Solaris 11 Zones configuration files The Solaris Zones configuration files should be in the format of the zonecfg export command. # zonecfg -z zone1 export > /var/tmp/zone1# cat /var/tmp/zone1 create -b set brand=solaris set zonepath=/rpool/zones/zone1 set autoboot=true set ip-type=exclusive add anet set linkname=net0 set lower-link=auto set configure-allowed-address=true set link-protection=mac-nospoof set mac-address=random end Create a backup copy of this file under a different name, for example, zone2. # cp /var/tmp/zone1 /var/tmp/zone2 Modify the second configuration file with the zone2 configuration information You should change the zonepath for example: set zonepath=/rpool/zones/zone2 Step2: Copy and share the Zones configuration files Create the NFS directory for the Zones configuration files # mkdir /export/zone_config Share the directory for the Zones configuration file # share –o ro /export/zone_config Copy the Zones configuration files into the NFS shared directory # cp /var/tmp/zone1 /var/tmp/zone2 /export/zone_config Verify that the NFS share has been created using the following command # share export_zone_config /export/zone_config nfs sec=sys,ro Step 3: Add the Global Zone as client to the Install Service Use the installadm create-client command to associate client (Global Zone) with the install service To find the MAC address of a system, use the dladm command as described in the dladm(1M) man page. The following command adds the client (Global Zone) with MAC address 0:14:4f:2:a:19 to the s11x86service install service. # installadm create-client -e “0:14:4f:2:a:19" -n s11x86service You can verify the client creation using the following command # installadm list –c Service Name Client Address Arch Image Path ------------ -------------- ---- ---------- s11x86service 00:14:4F:02:0A:19 i386 /export/auto_install/s11x86service We can see the client install service name (s11x86service), MAC address (00:14:4F:02:0A:19 and Architecture (i386). Step 4: Global Zone manifest setup First, get a list of the installation services and the manifests associated with them: # installadm list -m Service Name Manifest Status ------------ -------- ------ default-i386 orig_default Default s11x86service orig_default Default Then probe the s11x86service and the default manifest associated with it. The -m switch reflects the name of the manifest associated with a service. Since we want to capture that output into a file, we redirect the output of the command as follows: # installadm export -n s11x86service -m orig_default > /var/tmp/orig_default.xml Create a backup copy of this file under a different name, for example, orig-default2.xml, and edit the copy. # cp /var/tmp/orig_default.xml /var/tmp/orig_default2.xml Use the configuration element in the AI manifest for the client system to specify non-global zones. Use the name attribute of the configuration element to specify the name of the zone. Use the source attribute to specify the location of the config file for the zone.The source location can be any http:// or file:// location that the client can access during installation. The following sample AI manifest specifies two Non-Global Zones: zone1 and zone2 You should replace the server_ip with the ip address of the NFS server. <!DOCTYPE auto_install SYSTEM "file:///usr/share/install/ai.dtd.1"> <auto_install> <ai_instance> <target> <logical> <zpool name="rpool" is_root="true"> <filesystem name="export" mountpoint="/export"/> <filesystem name="export/home"/> <be name="solaris"/> </zpool> </logical> </target> <software type="IPS"> <source> <publisher name="solaris"> <origin name="http://pkg.oracle.com/solaris/release"/> </publisher> </source> <software_data action="install"> <name>pkg:/entire@latest</name> <name>pkg:/group/system/solaris-large-server</name> </software_data> </software> <configuration type="zone" name="zone1" source="file:///net/server_ip/export/zone_config/zone1"/> <configuration type="zone" name="zone2" source="file:///net/server_ip/export/zone_config/zone2"/> </ai_instance> </auto_install> The following example adds the /var/tmp/orig_default2.xml AI manifest to the s11x86service install service # installadm create-manifest -n s11x86service -f /var/tmp/orig_default2.xml -m gzmanifest You can verify the manifest creation using the following command # installadm list -n s11x86service -m Service/Manifest Name Status Criteria --------------------- ------ -------- s11x86service orig_default Default None gzmanifest Inactive None We can see from the command output that the new manifest named gzmanifest has been created and associated with the s11x86service install service. Step 5: Non Global Zone manifest setup The AI manifest for non-global zone installation is similar to the AI manifest for installing the global zone. If you do not provide a custom AI manifest for a non-global zone, the default AI manifest for Zones is used The default AI manifest for Zones is available at /usr/share/auto_install/manifest/zone_default.xml. In this example we should use the default AI manifest for zones The following sample default AI manifest for zones # cat /usr/share/auto_install/manifest/zone_default.xml <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>  <!DOCTYPE auto_install SYSTEM "file:///usr/share/install/ai.dtd.1"> <auto_install> <ai_instance name="zone_default"> <target> <logical> <zpool name="rpool">  <filesystem name="export" mountpoint="/export"/> <filesystem name="export/home"/> <be name="solaris"> <options> <option name="compression" value="on"/> </options> </be> </zpool> </logical> </target> <software type="IPS"> <destination>  </destination> <software_data action="install"> <name>pkg:/group/system/solaris-small-server</name> </software_data> </software> </ai_instance> </auto_install> (optional) We can customize the default AI manifest for Zones Create a backup copy of this file under a different name, for example, zone_default2.xml and edit the copy # cp /usr/share/auto_install/manifest/zone_default.xml /var/tmp/zone_default2.xml Edit the copy (/var/tmp/zone_default2.xml) The following example adds the /var/tmp/zone_default2.xml AI manifest to the s11x86service install service and specifies that zone1 and zone2 should use this manifest. # installadm create-manifest -n s11x86service -f /var/tmp/zone_default2.xml -m zones_manifest -c zonename="zone1 zone2" Note: Do not use the following elements or attributes in a non-global zone AI manifest: The auto_reboot attribute of the ai_instance element The http_proxy attribute of the ai_instance element The disk child element of the target element The noswap attribute of the logical element The nodump attribute of the logical element The configuration element Step 6: Global Zone profile setup We are going to create a global zone configuration profile which includes the host information for example: host name, ip address name services etc… # sysconfig create-profile –o /var/tmp/gz_profile.xml You need to provide the host information for example: Default router Root password DNS information The output should eventually disappear and be replaced by the initial screen of the System Configuration Tool (see Figure 2), where you can do the final configuration. Figure 2. Profile creation menu You can validate the profile using the following command # installadm validate -n s11x86service –P /var/tmp/gz_profile.xml Validating static profile gz_profile.xml... Passed Next, instantiate a profile with the install service. In our case, use the following syntax for doing this # installadm create-profile -n s11x86service -f /var/tmp/gz_profile.xml -p gz_profile You can verify profile creation using the following command # installadm list –n s11x86service -p Service/Profile Name Criteria -------------------- -------- s11x86service gz_profile None We can see that the gz_profie has been created and associated with the s11x86service Install service. Step 7: Setup the Solaris Zones configuration profiles The step should be similar to the Global zone profile creation on step 6 # sysconfig create-profile –o /var/tmp/zone1_profile.xml # sysconfig create-profile –o /var/tmp/zone2_profile.xml You can validate the profiles using the following command # installadm validate -n s11x86service -P /var/tmp/zone1_profile.xml Validating static profile zone1_profile.xml... Passed # installadm validate -n s11x86service -P /var/tmp/zone2_profile.xml Validating static profile zone2_profile.xml... Passed Next, associate the profiles with the install service The following example adds the zone1_profile.xml configuration profile to the s11x86service install service and specifies that zone1 should use this profile. # installadm create-profile -n s11x86service -f /var/tmp/zone1_profile.xml -p zone1_profile -c zonename=zone1 The following example adds the zone2_profile.xml configuration profile to the s11x86service install service and specifies that zone2 should use this profile. # installadm create-profile -n s11x86service -f /var/tmp/zone2_profile.xml -p zone2_profile -c zonename=zone2 You can verify the profiles creation using the following command # installadm list -n s11x86service -p Service/Profile Name Criteria -------------------- -------- s11x86service zone1_profile zonename = zone1 zone2_profile zonename = zone2 gz_profile None We can see that we have three profiles in the s11x86service install service Global Zone gz_profile zone1 zone1_profile zone2 zone2_profile. Step 8: Global Zone setup Associate the global zone client with the manifest and the profile that we create in the previous steps The following example adds the manifest and profile to the client (global zone), where: gzmanifest is the name of the manifest. gz_profile is the name of the configuration profile. mac="0:14:4f:2:a:19" is the client (global zone) mac address s11x86service is the install service name. # installadm set-criteria -m gzmanifest –p gz_profile -c mac="0:14:4f:2:a:19" -n s11x86service You can verify the manifest and profile association using the following command # installadm list -n s11x86service -p -m Service/Manifest Name Status Criteria --------------------- ------ -------- s11x86service gzmanifest mac = 00:14:4F:02:0A:19 orig_default Default None Service/Profile Name Criteria -------------------- -------- s11x86service gz_profile mac = 00:14:4F:02:0A:19 zone2_profile zonename = zone2 zone1_profile zonename = zone1 Step 9: Provision the host with the Non-Global Zones The next step is to boot the client system off the network and provision it using the Automated Install service that we just set up. First, boot the client system. Figure 3 shows the network boot attempt (when done on an x86 system): Figure 3. Network Boot Then you will be prompted by a GRUB menu, with a timer, as shown in Figure 4. The default selection (the "Text Installer and command line" option) is highlighted. Press the down arrow to highlight the second option labeled Automated Install, and then press Enter. The reason we need to do this is because we want to prevent a system from being automatically re-installed if it were to be booted from the network accidentally. Figure 4. GRUB Menu What follows is the continuation of a networked boot from the Automated Install server,. The client downloads a mini-root (a small set of files in which to successfully run the installer), identifies the location of the Automated Install manifest on the network, retrieves that manifest, and then processes it to identify the address of the IPS repository from which to obtain the desired software payload. Non-Global Zones are installed and configured on the first reboot after the Global Zone is installed. You can list all the Solaris Zones status using the following command # zoneadm list -civ Once the Zones are in running state you can login into the Zone using the following command # zlogin –z zone1 Troubleshooting Automated Installations If an installation to a client system failed, you can find the client log at /system/volatile/install_log. NOTE: Zones are not installed if any of the following errors occurs: A zone config file is not syntactically correct. A collision exists among zone names, zone paths, or delegated ZFS datasets in the set of zones to be installed Required datasets are not configured in the global zone. For more troubleshooting information see “Installing Oracle Solaris 11 Systems” Conclusion This paper demonstrated the benefits of using the Automated Install server to simplify the Non Global Zones setup, including the creation and configuration of the global zone manifest and the Solaris Zones profiles.

Read the article
Choosing an automated testing tool

- by pal25

My project is compatible only with Internet Explorer. I want the test scripts to get generated automatically as it is done in Selenium IDE. Can i use Selenium RC to test my application? I could not use Selenium IDE as it can be used only with Mozilla Firefox.

Read the article
TELERIK LAUNCHES NEW AUTOMATED TESTING TOOLS PRODUCT LINE

TELERIK LAUNCHES NEW AUTOMATED TESTING TOOLS PRODUCT LINE Merger with ArtOfTest repositions Telerik as a major player in the automated testing market Waltham, MA, April 13, 2010 Telerik, a leading provider of development tools and solutions for the Microsoft? .NET platform, today announced the launch of WebUI Test Studio 2010, an innovative and easy-to-use automated web-testing solution. Encompassing essential web technologies such as ASP.NET AJAX, Silverlight, and MVC, Teleriks WebUI Test Studio...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
Generating strongly biased radom numbers for tests

- by nobody

I want to run tests with randomized inputs and need to generate 'sensible' random numbers, that is, numbers that match good enough to pass the tested function's preconditions, but hopefully wreak havoc deeper inside its code. math.random() (I'm using Lua) produces uniformly distributed random numbers. Scaling these up will give far more big numbers than small numbers, and there will be very few integers. I would like to skew the random numbers (or generate new ones using the old function as a randomness source) in a way that strongly favors 'simple' numbers, but will still cover the whole range, I.e. extending up to positive/negative infinity (or ±1e309 for double). This means: numbers up to, say, ten should be most common, integers should be more common than fractions, numbers ending in 0.5 should be the most common fractions, followed by 0.25 and 0.75; then 0.125, and so on. A different description: Fix a base probability x such that probabilities will sum to one and define the probability of a number n as xk where k is the generation in which n is constructed as a surreal number1. That assigns x to 0, x2 to -1 and +1, x3 to -2, -1/2, +1/2 and +2, and so on. This gives a nice description of something close to what I want (it skews a bit too much), but is near-unusable for computing random numbers. The resulting distribution is nowhere continuous (it's fractal!), I'm not sure how to determine the base probability x (I think for infinite precision it would be zero), and computing numbers based on this by iteration is awfully slow (spending near-infinite time to construct large numbers). Does anyone know of a simple approximation that, given a uniformly distributed randomness source, produces random numbers very roughly distributed as described above? I would like to run thousands of randomized tests, quantity/speed is more important than quality. Still, better numbers mean less inputs get rejected. Lua has a JIT, so performance can't be reasonably predicted. Jumps based on randomness will break every prediction, and many calls to math.random() will be slow, too. This means a closed formula will be better than an iterative or recursive one. 1 Wikipedia has an article on surreal numbers, with a nice picture. A surreal number is a pair of two surreal numbers, i.e. x := {n|m}, and its value is the number in the middle of the pair, i.e. (for finite numbers) {n|m} = (n+m)/2 (as rational). If one side of the pair is empty, that's interpreted as increment (or decrement, if right is empty) by one. If both sides are empty, that's zero. Initially, there are no numbers, so the only number one can build is 0 := { | }. In generation two one can build numbers {0| } =: 1 and { |0} =: -1, in three we get {1| } =: 2, {|1} =: -2, {0|1} =: 1/2 and {-1|0} =: -1/2 (plus some more complex representations of known numbers, e.g. {-1|1} ? 0). Note that e.g. 1/3 is never generated by finite numbers because it is an infinite fraction – the same goes for floats, 1/3 is never represented exactly.

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
DRY for JMeter tests

- by jens

Is there a way to modularize JMeter tests. I have recorded several use cases for our application. Each of them is in a separate thread group in the same test plan. To control the workflow I wrote some primitives (e.g. postprocessor elements) that are used in many of these thread groups. Is there a way not to copy these elements into each thread group but to use some kind of referencing within the same test plan? What would also be helpful is a way to reference elements from a different file. Does anybody have any solutions or workarounds. I guess I am not the only one trying to follow the DRY principle...

Read the article
phpunit - generate tests for all the classes from a directory

- by joe

Hi! I have a directoy structure, and all the classes of the business logic are placed in the app_dir/lib/ directory. I would like to generate unit tests for all the classes from this lib/ folder. The problem is, that I haven't found any option to specify the source directory, only the source file: from app_dir: phpunit --skeleton-class lib/ Error: "lib/.php" could not be opened. Is it the only solution to write my own php script, which iterates through the /lib folder and calls the skeleton generator for every file found? And how can I specify the output folder, where all the generated test files are placed? Thanx, Joe

Read the article
Databases and the CI server

- by mlk

I have a CI server (Hudson) which merrily builds, runs unit tests and deploys to the development environment but I'd now like to get it running the integration tests. The integration tests will hit a database and that database will be consistently being changed to contain the data relevant to the test in question. This however leads to a problem - how do I make sure the database is not being splatted with data for one test and then that data being override by a second project before the first set of tests complete? I am current using the "hope" method, which is not working out too badly at the moment, but mostly due to the fact that we only have a small number of integration tests set up on CI. As I see it I have the following options: Test-local (in memory) databases I'm not sure if any in-memory databases handle all the scaryness of Oracles triggers and packages etc, and anything less I don't feel would be a worth while test. CI Executor-local databasesA fair amount of work would be needed to set this up and keep 'em up to date, but defiantly an option (most of the work is already done to keep the current CI database up-to-date). Single "integration test" executorLikely the easiest to implement, but would mean the integration tests could fall quite far behind. Locking the database (or set of tables) I'm sure I've missed some ways (please add them). How do you run database-based integration tests on the CI server? What issues have you had and what method do you recommend? (Note: While I use Hudson, I'm happy to accept answers for any CI server, the ideas I'm sure will be portable, even if the details are not). Cheers, Mlk

Read the article
Configuring TeamCity + NUnit unit tests so files can be loaded properly

- by Dave

In a nutshell, I have a solution that builds fine in the IDE, and the unit tests all run fine with the NUnit GUI (via the NUnitit VS2008 plugin). However, when I execute my TeamCity build runner, all unit tests that require file access (e.g. for running tests against specific XML files), I just get System.IO.DirectoryNotFoundExceptions. The reason for this is clear: it's looking for those supporting XML files loaded by various unit tests in the wrong folder. The way my unit tests are structured looks like this: +-- project folder +-- unit tests folder +-- test.xml +-- test.cs +-- project file.xaml +-- project file.xaml.cs All of my projects own their own UnitTests folder, which contains the .cs file and any XML files, XML Schemas, etc that are necessary to run the tests. So when I write my test.cs, I have it look for "test.xml" in the code because they are in the same folder (actually, I do something like ....\unit tests\test.xml, but that's kind of silly). As I said before, the tests run great in NUnit. But that's because the unit tests are part of the project. When running the unit tests from TeamCity, I am executing them against the assemblies that get copied to the main app's output folder. These unit test XML files should not be copied willy-nilly to the output folder just to make the tests pass. Can anyone suggest a better method of organizing my unit tests in each project (which are dependencies for the main app), such that I can execute the unit tests from NUnit and from the TeamCity build runner? The only other option I can come up with is to just put the testing XML data in code, rather than loading it from a file. I would rather not do this.

Read the article
Automated Error Reporting = More Robust Software

- by Laila

I would like to tell you how to revolutionize your software development process </marketing hyperbole> On a more serious note, we (Red Gate's .NET Development team) recently rolled a new tool into our development process which has made our lives dramatically easier AND improved the quality of our software, and I (& one of our developers, Alex Davies) just wanted to take a quick moment to share the love. I work with a development team that takes pride in what they ship, so we take software testing rather seriously. For every development project we run, we allocate at least one software tester for every two developers, and we never ship software without first shipping early access releases and betas to get user feedback. And therein lies the challenge -encouraging users to provide consistent, useful feedback is a headache, but without that feedback, improving the software is. tricky. Until fairly recently, we used the standard (if long-winded) approach of receiving bug reports of variable quality via email or through our support forums. If that didn't give us enough information to reproduce the problem - which was most of the time - we had to enter into a time-consuming to-and-fro conversation with the end-user, to get scrape together the data we needed to work out where the problem lay. As I'm sure you're aware, this is painfully slow. To the delight of the team, we recently got to work with SmartAssembly, which lets us embed automated exception and error reporting into our software with very little pain, and we decided to do a little dogfooding. As a result, we've have made a really handy (if perhaps slightly obvious) discovery: As soon as we release a beta, or indeed any release of software, we now get tonnes of customer feedback through automated error reports. Making this process easier for our users has dramatically increased the amount (and quality) of feedback we get. From their point of view, they get an experience similar to Microsoft's error reporting, and process is essentially idiot-proof. From our side of things, we can now react much faster to the information we get, fixing the bugs and shipping a new-and-improved release, which our users rather appreciate. Smiles and hugs all round. Even more so because, as we're use SmartAssembly's Automated Error Reporting, we get to avoid having to spend weeks building an exception reporting mechanism. It takes just a few minutes to add reporting to a project, and we get a bunch of useful information back, like a stack trace and the values of all the local variables, which we can use to fix bugs. Happily, "Automated Error Reporting = More Robust Software" can actually be read two ways: we've found that we not only ship higher quality software, but we also release within a shorter time. We can ship stable software that our users are happy to upgrade to, and we then bask in the glory of lots of positive customer feedback. Once we'd starting working with SmartAssembly, we were curious to know how widespread error reporting was as a practice. Our product manager ran a survey in autumn last year, and found that 40% of software developers never really considered deploying error reporting. Considering how we've now got plenty of experience on the subject, one of our dev guys, Alex Davies, thought we should share what we've learnt, and he's kindly offered to host a webinar on delivering robust software with Automated Error Reporting. Drawing on our own in-house development experiences, he'll cover how to add error reporting to your program, how to actually use the error reports to fix bugs (don't snigger, not everyone's as bright as you), how to customize the error report dialog that your users see, and how to automatically get log files from your users' machine. The webinar will take place on Jan 25th (that's next week). It's free to attend, but you'll still need to register to hear Alex's dulcet tones.

Read the article
How to do an automated installation of Ubuntu on 100 Remote machines?

- by user40876

Help! I desperately need some advice / help... I want an automated install (via CD or USB) of Ubuntu 10.04 ...on 100 remote machines located all over the country, using a Kickstart configuration file accessible from my web server. How do I create the boot CD (or USB)? How do I specifically add the boot parameters to that boot CD (or USB) to tell it the URL to use for it's automated Kickstart install?

Read the article
Create Automated Blogs Rapidly

Automated blogs simplify the content management job of webmasters, but this is not possible without the required product. Carty Studio's .NET based Auto Blogging Software helps you create automated blogs without much extra work as it grabs content from the relevant RSS Feeds automatically. After reading Anand's review you will understand the usefulness of the software.

Read the article
Create Automated Blogs Rapidly

Automated blogs simplify the content management job of webmasters, but this is not possible without the required product. Carty Studio's .NET based Auto Blogging Software helps you create automated blogs without much extra work as it grabs content from the relevant RSS Feeds automatically. After reading Anand's review you will understand the usefulness of the software.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

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 | Next Page >