Search Results

Search found 177 results on 8 pages for 'bdd'.

Page 3/8 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  | Next Page >

  • When writing tests for a Wordpress plugin, should i run them inside wordpress or in a normal browser?

    - by Nicola Peluchetti
    I have started using BDD for a wordpress plugin i'm working on and i'm rewriting the js codebase to do tests. I've encountered a few problems but i'm going steady now, i was wondering if i had the right approach, because i'm writing test that should pass in a normal browser environment and not inside wordpress. I choose to do this because i want my plugin to be totally indipendent from the wordpress environment, i'm using requirejs in a way that i don't expose any globals and i'm loading my version of jQuery that doesn't override the one that ships with Wordpress. In this way my plugin would work the same on every wordpress version and my code would not break if they cheange the jQuery version or someone use my plugin on an old wordpress version. I wonder if this is the right approach or if i should always test inside the environment i'm working in. Since wordpress implies some globals i had to write some function purely for testing purpose, like "get_ajax_url": function() { if( typeof window.ajaxurl === "undefined" ) { return "http://localhost/wordpress/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php"; } else { return window.ajaxurl; } }, but apart from that i got everything working right. What do you think?

    Read the article

  • Robotium BDD with Cucumber

    - by LucasGomes
    I want to know if you guys know how to make BDD tests with Robotium. As I research Robotium works with a different Virtual Machine (Dalvik) so I cannot run as Junit Test (Only with Android Junit Test). So I found a possible solution to run Robotium with Junit with RoboRemote https://github.com/groupon/robo-remote. But when i tried to integrate with cucumber the tests became unstable. So you guys know some way to make BDD tests using Robotium?

    Read the article

  • ParallelWork: Feature rich multithreaded fluent task execution library for WPF

    - by oazabir
    ParallelWork is an open source free helper class that lets you run multiple work in parallel threads, get success, failure and progress update on the WPF UI thread, wait for work to complete, abort all work (in case of shutdown), queue work to run after certain time, chain parallel work one after another. It’s more convenient than using .NET’s BackgroundWorker because you don’t have to declare one component per work, nor do you need to declare event handlers to receive notification and carry additional data through private variables. You can safely pass objects produced from different thread to the success callback. Moreover, you can wait for work to complete before you do certain operation and you can abort all parallel work while they are in-flight. If you are building highly responsive WPF UI where you have to carry out multiple job in parallel yet want full control over those parallel jobs completion and cancellation, then the ParallelWork library is the right solution for you. I am using the ParallelWork library in my PlantUmlEditor project, which is a free open source UML editor built on WPF. You can see some realistic use of the ParallelWork library there. Moreover, the test project comes with 400 lines of Behavior Driven Development flavored tests, that confirms it really does what it says it does. The source code of the library is part of the “Utilities” project in PlantUmlEditor source code hosted at Google Code. The library comes in two flavors, one is the ParallelWork static class, which has a collection of static methods that you can call. Another is the Start class, which is a fluent wrapper over the ParallelWork class to make it more readable and aesthetically pleasing code. ParallelWork allows you to start work immediately on separate thread or you can queue a work to start after some duration. You can start an immediate work in a new thread using the following methods: void StartNow(Action doWork, Action onComplete) void StartNow(Action doWork, Action onComplete, Action<Exception> failed) For example, ParallelWork.StartNow(() => { workStartedAt = DateTime.Now; Thread.Sleep(howLongWorkTakes); }, () => { workEndedAt = DateTime.Now; }); Or you can use the fluent way Start.Work: Start.Work(() => { workStartedAt = DateTime.Now; Thread.Sleep(howLongWorkTakes); }) .OnComplete(() => { workCompletedAt = DateTime.Now; }) .Run(); Besides simple execution of work on a parallel thread, you can have the parallel thread produce some object and then pass it to the success callback by using these overloads: void StartNow<T>(Func<T> doWork, Action<T> onComplete) void StartNow<T>(Func<T> doWork, Action<T> onComplete, Action<Exception> fail) For example, ParallelWork.StartNow<Dictionary<string, string>>( () => { test = new Dictionary<string,string>(); test.Add("test", "test"); return test; }, (result) => { Assert.True(result.ContainsKey("test")); }); Or, the fluent way: Start<Dictionary<string, string>>.Work(() => { test = new Dictionary<string, string>(); test.Add("test", "test"); return test; }) .OnComplete((result) => { Assert.True(result.ContainsKey("test")); }) .Run(); You can also start a work to happen after some time using these methods: DispatcherTimer StartAfter(Action onComplete, TimeSpan duration) DispatcherTimer StartAfter(Action doWork,Action onComplete,TimeSpan duration) You can use this to perform some timed operation on the UI thread, as well as perform some operation in separate thread after some time. ParallelWork.StartAfter( () => { workStartedAt = DateTime.Now; Thread.Sleep(howLongWorkTakes); }, () => { workCompletedAt = DateTime.Now; }, waitDuration); Or, the fluent way: Start.Work(() => { workStartedAt = DateTime.Now; Thread.Sleep(howLongWorkTakes); }) .OnComplete(() => { workCompletedAt = DateTime.Now; }) .RunAfter(waitDuration);   There are several overloads of these functions to have a exception callback for handling exceptions or get progress update from background thread while work is in progress. For example, I use it in my PlantUmlEditor to perform background update of the application. // Check if there's a newer version of the app Start<bool>.Work(() => { return UpdateChecker.HasUpdate(Settings.Default.DownloadUrl); }) .OnComplete((hasUpdate) => { if (hasUpdate) { if (MessageBox.Show(Window.GetWindow(me), "There's a newer version available. Do you want to download and install?", "New version available", MessageBoxButton.YesNo, MessageBoxImage.Information) == MessageBoxResult.Yes) { ParallelWork.StartNow(() => { var tempPath = System.IO.Path.Combine( Environment.GetFolderPath(Environment.SpecialFolder.ApplicationData), Settings.Default.SetupExeName); UpdateChecker.DownloadLatestUpdate(Settings.Default.DownloadUrl, tempPath); }, () => { }, (x) => { MessageBox.Show(Window.GetWindow(me), "Download failed. When you run next time, it will try downloading again.", "Download failed", MessageBoxButton.OK, MessageBoxImage.Warning); }); } } }) .OnException((x) => { MessageBox.Show(Window.GetWindow(me), x.Message, "Download failed", MessageBoxButton.OK, MessageBoxImage.Exclamation); }); The above code shows you how to get exception callbacks on the UI thread so that you can take necessary actions on the UI. Moreover, it shows how you can chain two parallel works to happen one after another. Sometimes you want to do some parallel work when user does some activity on the UI. For example, you might want to save file in an editor while user is typing every 10 second. In such case, you need to make sure you don’t start another parallel work every 10 seconds while a work is already queued. You need to make sure you start a new work only when there’s no other background work going on. Here’s how you can do it: private void ContentEditor_TextChanged(object sender, EventArgs e) { if (!ParallelWork.IsAnyWorkRunning()) { ParallelWork.StartAfter(SaveAndRefreshDiagram, TimeSpan.FromSeconds(10)); } } If you want to shutdown your application and want to make sure no parallel work is going on, then you can call the StopAll() method. ParallelWork.StopAll(); If you want to wait for parallel works to complete without a timeout, then you can call the WaitForAllWork(TimeSpan timeout). It will block the current thread until the all parallel work completes or the timeout period elapses. result = ParallelWork.WaitForAllWork(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1)); The result is true, if all parallel work completed. If it’s false, then the timeout period elapsed and all parallel work did not complete. For details how this library is built and how it works, please read the following codeproject article: ParallelWork: Feature rich multithreaded fluent task execution library for WPF http://www.codeproject.com/KB/WPF/parallelwork.aspx If you like the article, please vote for me.

    Read the article

  • Rescue overdue offshore projects and convince management to use automated tests

    - by oazabir
    I have published two articles on codeproject recently. One is a story where an offshore project was two months overdue, my friend who runs it was paying the team from his own pocket and he was drowning in ever increasing number of change requests and how we brainstormed together to come out of that situation. Tips and Tricks to rescue overdue projects Next one is about convincing management to go for automated test and give developers extra time per sprint, at the cost of reduced productivity for couple of sprints. It’s hard to negotiate this with even dev leads, let alone managers. Whenever you tell them - there’s going to be less features/bug fixes delivered for next 3 or 4 sprints because we want to automate the tests and reduce manual QA effort; everyone gets furious and kicks you out of the meeting. Especially in a startup where every sprint is jam packed with new features and priority bug fixes to satisfy various stakeholders, including the VCs, it’s very hard to communicate the benefits of automated tests across the board. Let me tell you of a story of one of my startups where I had the pleasure to argue on this and came out victorious. How to convince developers and management to use automated test instead of manual test If you like these, please vote for me!

    Read the article

  • Write your Tests in RSpec with IronRuby

    - by kazimanzurrashid
    [Note: This is not a continuation of my previous post, treat it as an experiment out in the wild. ] Lets consider the following class, a fictitious Fund Transfer Service: public class FundTransferService : IFundTransferService { private readonly ICurrencyConvertionService currencyConvertionService; public FundTransferService(ICurrencyConvertionService currencyConvertionService) { this.currencyConvertionService = currencyConvertionService; } public void Transfer(Account fromAccount, Account toAccount, decimal amount) { decimal convertionRate = currencyConvertionService.GetConvertionRate(fromAccount.Currency, toAccount.Currency); decimal convertedAmount = convertionRate * amount; fromAccount.Withdraw(amount); toAccount.Deposit(convertedAmount); } } public class Account { public Account(string currency, decimal balance) { Currency = currency; Balance = balance; } public string Currency { get; private set; } public decimal Balance { get; private set; } public void Deposit(decimal amount) { Balance += amount; } public void Withdraw(decimal amount) { Balance -= amount; } } We can write the spec with MSpec + Moq like the following: public class When_fund_is_transferred { const decimal ConvertionRate = 1.029m; const decimal TransferAmount = 10.0m; const decimal InitialBalance = 100.0m; static Account fromAccount; static Account toAccount; static FundTransferService fundTransferService; Establish context = () => { fromAccount = new Account("USD", InitialBalance); toAccount = new Account("CAD", InitialBalance); var currencyConvertionService = new Moq.Mock<ICurrencyConvertionService>(); currencyConvertionService.Setup(ccv => ccv.GetConvertionRate(Moq.It.IsAny<string>(), Moq.It.IsAny<string>())).Returns(ConvertionRate); fundTransferService = new FundTransferService(currencyConvertionService.Object); }; Because of = () => { fundTransferService.Transfer(fromAccount, toAccount, TransferAmount); }; It should_decrease_from_account_balance = () => { fromAccount.Balance.ShouldBeLessThan(InitialBalance); }; It should_increase_to_account_balance = () => { toAccount.Balance.ShouldBeGreaterThan(InitialBalance); }; } and if you run the spec it will give you a nice little output like the following: When fund is transferred » should decrease from account balance » should increase to account balance 2 passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped, took 1.14 seconds (MSpec). Now, lets see how we can write exact spec in RSpec. require File.dirname(__FILE__) + "/../FundTransfer/bin/Debug/FundTransfer" require "spec" require "caricature" describe "When fund is transferred" do Convertion_Rate = 1.029 Transfer_Amount = 10.0 Initial_Balance = 100.0 before(:all) do @from_account = FundTransfer::Account.new("USD", Initial_Balance) @to_account = FundTransfer::Account.new("CAD", Initial_Balance) currency_convertion_service = Caricature::Isolation.for(FundTransfer::ICurrencyConvertionService) currency_convertion_service.when_receiving(:get_convertion_rate).with(:any, :any).return(Convertion_Rate) fund_transfer_service = FundTransfer::FundTransferService.new(currency_convertion_service) fund_transfer_service.transfer(@from_account, @to_account, Transfer_Amount) end it "should decrease from account balance" do @from_account.balance.should be < Initial_Balance end it "should increase to account balance" do @to_account.balance.should be > Initial_Balance end end I think the above code is self explanatory, treat the require(line 1- 4) statements as the add reference of our visual studio projects, we are adding all the required libraries with this statement. Next, the describe which is a RSpec keyword. The before does exactly the same as NUnit's Setup or MsTest’s TestInitialize attribute, but in the above we are using before(:all) which acts as ClassInitialize of MsTest, that means it will be executed only once before all the test methods. In the before(:all) we are first instantiating the from and to accounts, it is same as creating with the full name (including namespace)  like fromAccount = new FundTransfer.Account(.., ..), next, we are creating a mock object of ICurrencyConvertionService, check that for creating the mock we are not using the Moq like the MSpec version. This is somewhat an interesting issue of IronRuby or maybe the DLR, it seems that it is not possible to use the lambda expression that most of the mocking tools uses in arrange phase in Iron Ruby, like: currencyConvertionService.Setup(ccv => ccv.GetConvertionRate(Moq.It.IsAny<string>(), Moq.It.IsAny<string>())).Returns(ConvertionRate); But the good news is, there is already an excellent mocking tool called Caricature written completely in IronRuby which we can use to mock the .NET classes. May be all the mocking tool providers should give some thought to add the support for the DLR, so that we can use the tool that we are already familiar with. I think the rest of the code is too simple, so I am skipping the explanation. Now, the last thing, how we are going to run it with RSpec, lets first install the required gems. Open you command prompt and type the following: igem sources -a http://gems.github.com This will add the GitHub as gem source. Next type: igem install uuidtools caricature rspec and at last we have to create a batch file so that we can execute it in the Notepad++, create a batch like in the IronRuby bin directory like my previous post and put the following in that batch file: @echo off cls call spec %1 --format specdoc pause Next, add a run menu and shortcut in the Notepad++ like my previous post. Now when we run it it will show the following output: When fund is transferred - should decrease from account balance - should increase to account balance Finished in 0.332042 seconds 2 examples, 0 failures Press any key to continue . . . You will complete code of this post in the bottom. That's it for today. Download: RSpecIntegration.zip

    Read the article

  • TDD/Tests too much an overhead/maintenance burden?

    - by MeshMan
    So you've heard it many times from those who do not truly understand the values of testing. Just to start things out, I'm a follower of Agile and Testing... I recently had a discussion about performing TDD on a product re-write where the current team does not practice unit testing on any level, and probably have never heard of the dependency injection technique or test patterns/design etc (we won't even get on to clean code). Now, I am fully responsible for the rewrite of this product and I'm told that attempting it in the fashion of TDD, will merely make it a maintenance nightmare and impossible for the team maintain. Furthermore, as it's a front-end application (not web-based), adding tests is pointless, as the business drive changes (by changes they mean improvements of course), the tests will become out of date, other developers who come on to the project in the future will not maintain them and become more of a burden for them to fix etc. I can understand that TDD in a team that does not currently hold any testing experience doesn't sound good, but my argument in this case is that I can teach my practice to those around me, but further more, I know that TDD makes BETTER software. Even if I was to produce the software using TDD, and throw all the tests away on handing it over to a maintenance team, it surely would be a better approach than not using TDD at all from the start? I've been shot down as I've mentioned doing TDD on most projects for a team that have never heard of it. The thought of "interfaces" and strange looking DI constructors scares them off... Can anyone please help me in what is normally a very short conversation of trying to sell TDD and my approach to people? I usually have a very short window of argument before falling at the knees to the company/team.

    Read the article

  • Behavior-Driven Development / Use case diagram

    - by Mik378
    Regarding growing of Behavior-Driven Development imposing acceptance testing, are use cases diagram useful or do they lead to an "over-documentation"? Indeed, acceptance tests representing specifications by example, as use cases promote despite of a more generic manner (since cases, not scenarios), aren't they too similar to treat them both at the time of a newly created project? From this link, one opinion is: Another realization I had is that if you do UseCases and automated AcceptanceTests you are essentially doubling your work. There is duplication between the UseCases and the AcceptanceTests. I think there is a good case to be made that UserStories + AcceptanceTests are more efficient way to work when compared to UseCases + AcceptanceTests. What to think about?

    Read the article

  • Node.JS testing with Jasmine, databases, and pre-existing code

    - by Jim Rubenstein
    I've recently built the start of a core system which is likely going turn into a monster product. I'm building the system with node.js, and decided after I got a small base built, that It'd be a great idea to start using some sort of automated test suite to test the application. I decided to use jasmine, as it seems pretty solid and has a lot of features for stubbing spying and mocking methods and classes. The application has a lot of external data stores and api access (kestrel, mysql, mongodb, facebook, and more). My issue is, I've got a good amount of code written that I want to start testing - as it represents the underpinnings of the application. What are the best practices for testing methods/classes that access external APIs that I may or may not have control over? As an example, I have a data structure that fetches a bunch of data from a MySQL database. I want to test the method that retrieves the data; and I'm not sure how to go about it. I could test the fetch method which is supposed to return an array of objects, but to isolate the method from the database, I need to define my own fixture data. So what I end up doing is stubbing the mysql execution, and returning a static dataset. So, I end up writing a function that returns the dataset that makes my test pass. That doesn't seem to actually test the code, other than verifying a method is being called. I know this is kind of abstract and vague, it seems that the idea of testing is very much abstract though, so hopefully someone has some experience and can guide me in the right direction. Any advice, or reading I can do is more than welcomed. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Mock RequireJS define dependencies with config.map

    - by Aligned
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/Aligned/archive/2014/08/18/mock-requirejs-define-dependencies-with-config.map.aspxI had a module dependency, that I’m pulling down with RequireJS that I needed to use and write tests against. In this case, I don’t care about the actual implementation of the module (it’s simple enough that I’m just avoiding some AJAX calls). EDIT: make sure you look at the bottom example after the edit before using the config.map approach. I found that there is an easier way. I did not want to change the constructor of the consumer as I had a chain of changes that would have to be made and that would have been to invasive for this task. I found a question on StackOverflow with a short, but helpful answer from “Artem Oboturov”. We can use the config.map from RequireJs to achieve this. Here is some code: A module example (“usefulModule” in Common/Modules/usefulModule.js): define([], function() { "use strict"; var testMethod = function() { ... }; // add more functionality of the module return { testMethod; } }); A consumer of usefulModule example: define([ "Commmon/Modules/usefulModule" ], function(usefulModule) { "use strict"; var consumerModule = function(){ var self = this; // add functionality of the module } }); Using config.map in the html of the test runner page (and in your Karma config –> I’m still trying to figure this out): map: {'*': { // replace usefulModule with a mock 'Common/Modules/usefulModule': '/Tests/Specs/Common/usefulModuleMock.js' } } With the new mapping, Require will load usefulModuleMock.js from Tests/Specs/Common instead of the real implementation. Some of the answers on StackOverflow mentioned Squire.js, which looked interesting, but I wasn’t ready to introduce a new library at this time. That’s all you need to be able to mock a depency in RequireJS. However, there are many good cases when you should pass it in through the constructor instead of this approach.   EDIT: After all that, here’s another, probably better way: The consumer class, updated: define([ "Commmon/Modules/usefulModule" ], function(UsefulModule) { "use strict"; var consumerModule = function(){ var self = this; self.usefulModule = new UsefulModule(); // add functionality of the module } }); Jasmine test: define([ "consumerModule", "/UnitTests/Specs/Common/Mocks/usefulModuleMock.js" ], function(consumerModule, UsefulModuleMock){ describe("when mocking out the module", function(){ it("should probably just override the property", function(){ var consumer = new consumerModule(); consumer.usefulModule = new UsefulModuleMock(); }); }); });   Thanks for letting me think out loud :-).

    Read the article

  • Should selenium tests be written in imperative style?

    - by Amogh Talpallikar
    Is an automation tester supposed to know concepts of OOPS and design patterns to write Tests in a way where changes & code re-use are possible? For example, I pick up Java to write cucumber step definitions that instruct a selenium webdriver. Should I be using a lot of inheritance, interfaces, delegation etc. to make life easier or would that be overly complicated for something that should just line by line instructions?

    Read the article

  • Using NSpec at various architectural layers

    - by nono
    Having read the quick start at nspec.org, I realized that NSpec might be a useful tool in a scenario which was becoming a bit cumbersome with NUnit alone. I'm adding an OAuth (or, DotNetOpenAuth) to a website and quickly made a mess of writing test methods such as [Test] public void UserIsLoggedInLocallyPriorToInvokingExternalLoginAndExternalLoginSucceedsAndExternalProviderIdIsNotAlreadyAssociatedWithUserAccount() { ... } ... and I wound up with maybe a dozen permutations of this theme, for the user already being logged in locally and not locally, the external login succeeding or failing, etc. Not only were the method names unwieldy, but every test needed a setup that contained parts in common with a different set of other tests. I realized that NSpec's incremental setup capabilities would work great for this, and for a while I was trucking a long wonderfully, with code like act = () => { actionResult = controller.ExternalLoginCallback(returnUrl); }; context["The user is already logged in"] = () => { before = () => identity.Setup(x => x.IsAuthenticated).Returns(true); context["The external login succeeds"] = () => { before = () => oauth.Setup(x => x.VerifyAuthentication(It.IsAny<string>())).Returns(new AuthenticationResult(true, providerName, "provideruserid", "username", new Dictionary<string, string>())); context["External login already exists for current user"] = () => { before = () => authService.Setup(x => x.ExternalLoginExistsForUser(It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>())).Returns(true); it["Should add 'login sucessful' alert"] = () => { var alerts = (IList<Alert>)controller.TempData[TempDataKeys.AlertCollection]; alerts[0].Message.should_be_same("Login successful"); alerts[0].AlertType.should_be(AlertType.Success); }; it["Should return a redirect result"] = () => actionResult.should_cast_to<RedirectToRouteResult>(); }; context["External login already exists for another user"] = () => { before = () => authService.Setup(x => x.ExternalLoginExistsForAnyOtherUser(It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>())).Returns(true); it["Adds an error alert"] = () => { var alerts = (IList<Alert>)controller.TempData[TempDataKeys.AlertCollection]; alerts[0].Message.should_be_same("The external login you requested is already associated with a different user account"); alerts[0].AlertType.should_be(AlertType.Error); }; it["Should return a redirect result"] = () => actionResult.should_cast_to<RedirectToRouteResult>(); }; This approach seemed to work magnificently until I prepared to write test code for my ApplicationServices layer, to which I delegate viewmodel manipulation from my MVC controllers, and which coordinates the operations of the lower data repository layer: public void CreateUserAccountFromExternalLogin(RegisterExternalLoginModel model) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public void AssociateExternalLoginWithUser(string userName, string provider, string providerUserId) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } public string GetLocalUserName(string provider, string providerUserId) { throw new NotImplementedException(); } I have no idea what in the world to name the test class, the test methods, or even if I should perhaps include the testing for this layer into the test class from my large code snippet above, so that a single feature or user action could be tested without regard to architectural layering. I can't find any tutorials or blog posts which cover more than simple examples, so I would appreciate any recommendations or pointing in the right direction. I would even welcome "your question is invalid"-type answers as long as some explanation is provided.

    Read the article

  • What is the best Binary Decision Diagram library for Java?

    - by reprogrammer
    A Binary Decision Diagram (BDD) is a data structure to represent boolean functions. I'd like use this data structure in a Java program. My search for Java based BDD libraries resulted into the following packages. Java Decision Diagram Libraries JavaBDD JDD JBDD bddbddb If you know of any other BDD libraries available for Java programs, please let me know so that I add it to the list above. If you have used any of these libraries, please tell me about your experience with the library. In particular, I'd like you to compare the available libraries along the following dimensions. Quality. Is the library mature and reasonably bug free? Performance. How do you evaluate the performance of the library? Support. Could you easily get support whenever you encountered a problem with the library? Was the library well documented? Ease of use. Was the API well designed? Could you install and use the library quickly and easily? Please mention the version of the library that you are evaluating.

    Read the article

  • Which Java library for Binary Decision Diagrams?

    - by reprogrammer
    A Binary Decision Diagram (BDD) is a data structure to represent boolean functions. I'd like use this data structure in a Java program. My search for Java based BDD libraries resulted into the following packages. Java Decision Diagram Libraries JavaBDD JDD If you know of any other BDD libraries available for Java programs, please let me know so that I add it to the list above. If you have used any of these libraries, please tell me about your experience with the library. In particular, I'd like you to compare the available libraries along the following dimensions. Quality. Is the library mature and reasonably bug free? Performance. How do you evaluate the performance of the library? Support. Could you easily get support whenever you encountered a problem with the library? Was the library well documented? Ease of use. Was the API well designed? Could you install and use the library quickly and easily? Please mention the version of the library that you are evaluating.

    Read the article

  • Testing ActionFilterAttributes with MSpec

    - by Tomas Lycken
    I'm currently trying to grasp MSpec, mainly to learn new ways of (T/B)DD to be able to make an educated decision on which technology to use. Previously, I've mostly (read: only) used the built-in MSTest framework with Moq, so BDD is quite new for me. I'm writing an ASP.NET MVC app, and I want to implement PRG. Last time I did this, I used action filters to export and import ModelState via TempData, so that I could return a RedirectResult and the validation errors would still be there when the user got the view. I tested that scenario by verifying two things: a) That the ExportModelStateAttribute I had written was applied (among tests for my controller) b) That the attribute worked (among tests for action filter attributes) However, in BDD I've understood I should be even more concerned with behavior, and even less with implementation. This means I should probably just verify that the model state is in tempdata when the action has finished executing - not necessarily that it's done via an attribute. To further complicate things, attributes are not run when calling the action directly in the test, so I can't just call the action and see if the job's been done. How should I spec/test this in MSpec?

    Read the article

  • Best practices for TDD BDD with code that uses external services / api

    - by adam
    I'm using a twitter gem which basically accesses twitter and lets me grab tweets, timeline etc. Its really good but I have a lot of my code that uses the stuff it returns and I need to test it. The things the gem returns aren't exactly simple strings, there pretty complex objects (scary as well) so im left scratching my head. So basically I'm looking for an answer, book, blog, open-source project that can show me the rights and wrongs of testing around external services. answers that are either not language centric or ruby/rails centric would most greatly be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How to assert on number of html table rows in ruby using capybara + cucumber

    - by Neil
    I am trying to get to grips with BDD web development in Ruby using cucumber + capybara and I am stuck at what should be an easy task - just to check the number of rows in a table. Something along the lines of: page.should have_xpath("//table[@id='myTable']") find("//table[@id='myTable']/tr").length.should = 3 But this doesn't work and I can't find a way to assert against the table length. Any ideas anyone (please be easy on me tho' I'm a ruby nooby) Thanks in advance Neil

    Read the article

  • How can I decide what to test manually, and what to trust to automated tests?

    - by bhazzard
    We have a ton of developers and only a few QA folks. The developers have been getting more involved in qa throughout the development process by writing automated tests, but our QA practices are mostly manual. What I'd love is if our development practices were BDD and TDD and we grew a robust test suite. The question is: While building such a testing suite, how can we decide what we can trust to the tests, and what we should continue testing manually?

    Read the article

  • How best to set up MDT developement and production?

    - by nray
    What's your MDT 2010 test and prod setup? What do you consider best practice? Is it best to use linked deployment shares, and replicate from development to production when testing is complete? What about backing out, if something breaks? Does anyone run MDT shares in DFS, or is there no support in the WinPE boot image for DFS shares? Or what about moving the production share name from one deployment share to another, as you add and test more OS versions, drivers, attributes, etc?

    Read the article

  • Can I override task :environment in test_helper.rb to test rake tasks?

    - by Michael Barton
    I have a series of rake tasks in a Rakefile which I'd like to test as part of my specs etc. Each task is defined in the form: task :do_somthing => :environment do # Do something with the database here end Where the :environment task sets up an ActiveRecord/DataMapper database connection and classes. I'm not using this as part of Rails but I have a series of tests which I like to run as part of BDD. This snippet illustrates how I'm trying to test the rake tasks. def setup @rake = Rake::Application.new Rake.application = @rake load File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../../tasks/do_something.rake' end should "import data" do @rake["do_something"].invoke assert something_in_the_database end So my request for help - is it possible to over-ride the :environment task in my test_helper.rb file so I my rake testing interacts with the my test database, rather than production? I've tried redefining the task in the helper file, but this doesn't work. Any help for a solution would be great, as I've been stuck on this for the past week.

    Read the article

  • Convert C# unit test names to English (testdox style)

    - by Igor Zevaka
    I have a whole bunch of unit tests written in MbUnit and I would like to generate plain English sentences from test names. The concept is introduced here: http://dannorth.net/introducing-bdd This is from the article: public class CustomerLookupTest extends TestCase { testFindsCustomerById() { ... } testFailsForDuplicateCustomers() { ... } ... } renders something like this: CustomerLookup - finds customer by id - fails for duplicate customers - ... Unfortunately the tool quoted in the above article (testdox) is Java based. Is there one for .NET? Sounds like this would be something pretty simple to write, but I simply don't have the bandwidth and want to use something already written.

    Read the article

  • How do I get SpecFlow to expect an exception?

    - by Roger Lipscombe
    I'm using SpecFlow, and I'd like to write a scenario such as the following: Scenario: Pressing add with an empty stack throws an exception Given I have entered nothing into the calculator When I press add Then it should throw an exception It's calculator.Add() that's going to throw an exception, so how do I handle this in the method marked [Then]?

    Read the article

  • When using a mocking framework and MSPEC where do you set your stubs

    - by Kev Hunter
    I am relatively new to using MSpec and as I write more and more tests it becomes obvious to reduce duplication you often have to use a base class for your setup as per Rob Conery's article I am happy with using the AssertWasCalled method to verify my expectations, but where do you set up a stub's return value, I find it useful to set the context in the base class injecting my dependencies but that (I think) means that I need to set my stubs up in the Because delegate which just feels wrong. Is there a better approach I am missing?

    Read the article

  • Why doesn't every class in the .Net framework have a corresponding interface?

    - by Thorsten Lorenz
    Since I started to develop in a test/behavior driven style, I appreciated the ability to mock out every dependency. Since mocking frameworks like Moq work best when told to mock an interface, I now implement an interface for almost every class I create b/c most likely I will have to mock it out in a test eventually. Well, and programming to an interface is good practice, anyways. At times, my classes take dependencies on .Net classes (e.g. FileSystemWatcher, DispatcherTimer). It would be great in that case to have an interface, so I could depend on an IDispatcherTimer instead, to be able to pass it a mock and simulate its behavior to see if my system under test reacts correctly. Unfortunately both of above mentioned classes do not implement such interfaces, so I have to resort to creating adapters, that do nothing else but inherit from the original class and conform to an interface, that I then can use. Here is such an adapter for the DispatcherTimer and the corresponding interface: using System; using System.Windows.Threading; public interface IDispatcherTimer { #region Events event EventHandler Tick; #endregion #region Properties Dispatcher Dispatcher { get; } TimeSpan Interval { get; set; } bool IsEnabled { get; set; } object Tag { get; set; } #endregion #region Public Methods void Start(); void Stop(); #endregion } /// <summary> /// Adapts the DispatcherTimer class to implement the <see cref="IDispatcherTimer"/> interface. /// </summary> public class DispatcherTimerAdapter : DispatcherTimer, IDispatcherTimer { } Although this is not the end of the world, I wonder, why the .Net developers didn't take the minute to make their classes implement these interfaces from the get go. It puzzles me especially since now there is a big push for good practices from inside Microsoft. Does anyone have any (maybe inside) information why this contradiction exists?

    Read the article

  • Testing a scoped find in a Rails controller with RSpec

    - by Joseph DelCioppio
    I've got a controller called SolutionsController whose index action is different depending on the value of params[:user_id]. If its nil, then it simply displays all of the solutions on my site, but if its not nil, then it displays all of the solutions for the given user id. Here it is: def index if(params[:user_id]) @solutions = @user.solutions.find(:all) else @solutions = Solution.find(:all) end end and @user is determined like this: private def load_user if(params[:user_id ]) @user = User.find(params[:user_id]) end end I've got an Rspec test to test the index action if the user is nil: describe "GET index" do context "when user_id is nil" do it "should find all of the solutions" do Solution.should_receive(:find).with(:all).and_return(@solutions) get :index end end end however, can someone tell me how I write a similar test for the other half of my controller, when the user id isn't nil? Something like: describe "GET index" do context "when user_id isn't nil" do before(:each) do @user = Factory.create(:user) @solutions = 7.times{Factory.build(:solution, :user => @user)} @user.stub!(:solutions).and_return(@solutions) end it "should find all of the solutions owned by a user" do @user.should_receive(:solutions).and_return(@solutions) get :index, :user_id => @user.id end end end But that doesn't work. Can someone help me out? Joe

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8  | Next Page >