Search Results

Search found 65503 results on 2621 pages for 'real application testing'.

Page 32/2621 | < Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >

  • Testing a patch to the Rails mysql adapter

    - by Sleepycat
    I wrote a little monkeypatch to the Rails MySQLAdapter and want to package it up to use it in my other projects. I am trying to write some tests for it but I am still new to testing and I am not sure how to test this. Can someone help get me started? Here is the code I want to test: unless RAILS_ENV == 'production' module ActiveRecord module ConnectionAdapters class MysqlAdapter < AbstractAdapter def select_with_explain(sql, name = nil) explanation = execute_with_disable_logging('EXPLAIN ' + sql) e = explanation.all_hashes.first exp = e.collect{|k,v| " | #{k}: #{v} "}.join log(exp, 'Explain') select_without_explain(sql, name) end def execute_with_disable_logging(sql, name = nil) #:nodoc: #Run a query without logging @connection.query(sql) rescue ActiveRecord::StatementInvalid => exception if exception.message.split(":").first =~ /Packets out of order/ raise ActiveRecord::StatementInvalid, "'Packets out of order' error was received from the database. Please update your mysql bindings (gem install mysql) and read http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/password-hashing.html for more information. If you're on Windows, use the Instant Rails installer to get the updated mysql bindings." else raise end end alias_method_chain :select, :explain end end end end Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Boost Unit testing memory reuse causing tests that should fail to pass

    - by Knyphe
    We have started using the boost unit testing library for a large existing code base, and I have run into some trouble with unit tests incorrectly passing, seemingly due to the reuse of memory on the stack. Here is my situation: BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(test_select_base_instantiation_default) { SelectBase selectBase(); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getSelectType(), false); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getTypeName(_T("")); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getEntityType(), -1); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getDataPos(), -1); } BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(test_select_base_instantiation_default) { SelectBase selectBase(true, _T("abc")); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getSelectType(), false); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getTypeName(_T("abc")); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getEntityType(), -1); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getDataPos(), -1); } The first test passed correctly, initializing all the variables. The constructor in the second unit test did not correctly set EntityType or DataPosition, but the unit test passed. I was able to get it to fail by placing some variables on the stack in the second test, like so: BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(test_select_base_instantiation_default) { int a, b; SelectBase selectBase(true, _T("abc")); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getSelectType(), false); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getTypeName(_T("abc")); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getEntityType(), -1); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getDataPos(), -1); } If there is only one int, only the dataPos CHECK_EQUAL fails, but if there are two, both EntityType and DataPos fail, so it seems pretty clear that this is an issue with the variables being created on the same stack memory or some such. Is there a good way to clear the memory between each unit test, or am I potentially using the library incorrectly or writing bad tests? Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Unit testing that an event is raised in C#, using reflection

    - by Thomas
    I want to test that setting a certain property (or more generally, executing some code) raises a certain event on my object. In that respect my problem is similar to http://stackoverflow.com/questions/248989/unit-testing-that-an-event-is-raised-in-c, but I need a lot of these tests and I hate boilerplate. So I'm looking for a more general solution, using reflection. Ideally, I would like to do something like this: [TestMethod] public void TestWidth() { MyClass myObject = new MyClass(); AssertRaisesEvent(() => { myObject.Width = 42; }, myObject, "WidthChanged"); } For the implementation of the AssertRaisesEvent, I've come this far: private void AssertRaisesEvent(Action action, object obj, string eventName) { EventInfo eventInfo = obj.GetType().GetEvent(eventName); int raisedCount = 0; Action incrementer = () => { ++raisedCount; }; Delegate handler = /* what goes here? */; eventInfo.AddEventHandler(obj, handler); action.Invoke(); eventInfo.RemoveEventHandler(obj, handler); Assert.AreEqual(1, raisedCount); } As you can see, my problem lies in creating a Delegate of the appropriate type for this event. The delegate should do nothing except invoke incrementer. Because of all the syntactic syrup in C#, my notion of how delegates and events really work is a bit hazy. How to do this?

    Read the article

  • Testing a Gui-heavy WPF application.

    - by Hamish Grubijan
    We (my colleagues) have a messy 12 y.o. mature app that is GUI-based, and the current plan is to add new dialogs & other GUI in WPF, as well as replace some of the older dialogs in WPF as well. At the same time we wish to be able to test that Monster - GUI automation in a maintainable way. Some challenges: The application is massive. It constantly gains new features. It is being changed around (bug fixes, patches). It has a back end, and a layer in-between. The state of it can get out of whack if you beat it to death. What we want is: Some tool that can automate testing of WPF. auto-discovery of what the inputs and the outputs of the dialog are. An old test should still work if you add a label that does nothing. It should fail, however, if you remove a necessary text field. It would be very nice if the test suite was easy to maintain, if it ran and did not break most of the time. Every new dialog should be created with testability in mind. At this point I do not know exactly what I want, so I am marking this as a community wiki. If having to test a huge GUI-based app rings the bell (even if not in WPF), then please share your good, bad and ugly experiences here.

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing a rails 2.3.5 plugin

    - by brad
    I'm writing a new plugin for a rails 2.3.5 app. I've included an app directory (which makes it an engine) so i can easily load some extra routes. Not sure if that affects anything. Anyway, in the test directory i have two files: test_helper.rb and my_plugin_test.rb These files were generated automatically using script/generate plugin my_plugin When I go to vendor/plugins/my_plugin directory and run rake test they don't seem to run. I get the following console output: (in /Users/me/Repos/my_app/source/trunk/vendor/plugins/my_plugin) /Users/me/.rvm/rubies/jruby-1.4.0/bin/jruby -I"lib:lib:test" "/Users/me/.rvm/gems/jruby-1.4.0/gems/rake-0.8.7/lib/rake/rake_test_loader.rb" "test/my_plugin_test.rb" So it obviously sees my test file, but none of the tests inside get run, I just get back to my console prompt. What am I missing here? I figured the generated code would work out of the box Here are the two files test_helper.rb require 'rubygems' require 'active_support' require 'active_support/test_case' my_plugin_test.rb require 'test_helper' class MyPluginTest < ActiveSupport::TestCase # Replace this with your real tests. test "the truth" do assert true end test "Factories are supported" do assert_not_nil Factory end end File structure vendor - plugins - my_plugin - app - config - routes.rb - generators - my_plugin - some generator files.rb - lib - my_plugin.rb - my_plugin - my_plugin_lib_file.rb - rails - init.rb - Rakefile - tasks - my_plugin_tasks.rake - test - test_helper.rb - my_plugin_test.rb

    Read the article

  • Visual C++ overrides/mock objects for unit testing?

    - by Mark
    When I'm running unit tests, I want to be able to "stub out" or create a mock object, but I'm running into DLL Hell. For example: There are two DLL libraries built: A.dll and B.dll -- Classes in A.dll have calls to classes in B.dll so when A.dll was built, the link line was using B.lib for the defintions. My test driver (Foo.exe) is testing classes in A.dll, so it links against A.lib. However, I want to "stub out" some of the calls A.dll makes to B.dll with simple versions (return basic value, no DB look up, etc). I can't build an Override.dll that just overrides the needed methods (not entire classes) and replace B.dll because Foo.exe will A) complain that B.dll is missing if I just remove it and put Override.dll in it's place or B) if I rename Override.dll to B.dll, Foo.exe complains that there are unresolved symbols because Override.dll is not a complete implementation of B.dll. Is there a way to do this? Is there a way to statically link Foo.exe with A.lib, B.lib and Override.lib such that it will work without having to completely rebuild A.lib and B.lib to remove the __delcspec(dllexport)? Is there another option?

    Read the article

  • maven and unit testing - combining maven surefire plugin AND testNG eclipse plugin

    - by lisak
    Hey, could you please share your way of unit testing in eclipse ? Are you using surefire plugin, m2eclipse & maven, or only testNG eclipse plugin ? Do you combine these alternatives ? I'm using testNG + maven surefire-plugin and I had been using the testNG eclipse plugin a year ago so that I could see the results in testNG view. Then I started using Maven, but when I do "maven test phase" using m2eclipse, there is only console output and surefire reports that I can check in browser and to choose what test suite, test, or test method can be set up only via testng.xml. On the other hand, if you use only surefire plugin and you have some specific settings regarding classpath etc., that you rely on, then running tests via testNG eclipse plugin doesn't have to be compatible with your code. Using surefire plugin, the classpath is different - target/test-classes and target/classes - than using testNG plugin, that is using the project classpath. How do you go about what I was just talking about? Is it possible to synchronize "maven test" using m2eclipse and surefire plugin WITH testNG eclipse plugin and view ? EDITED: I'm also wondering, why the Maven project ("Java build path") output folder is target/classes for src/main and src/test whereas surefire plugin makes two locations target/test-classes and target/classes Thank you very much for your your opinions.

    Read the article

  • Testing When Correctness is Poorly Defined?

    - by dsimcha
    I generally try to use unit tests for any code that has easily defined correct behavior given some reasonably small, well-defined set of inputs. This works quite well for catching bugs, and I do it all the time in my personal library of generic functions. However, a lot of the code I write is data mining code that basically looks for significant patterns in large datasets. Correct behavior in this case is often not well defined and depends on a lot of different inputs in ways that are not easy for a human to predict (i.e. the math can't reasonably be done by hand, which is why I'm using a computer to solve the problem in the first place). These inputs can be very complex, to the point where coming up with a reasonable test case is near impossible. Identifying the edge cases that are worth testing is extremely difficult. Sometimes the algorithm isn't even deterministic. Usually, I do the best I can by using asserts for sanity checks and creating a small toy test case with a known pattern and informally seeing if the answer at least "looks reasonable", without it necessarily being objectively correct. Is there any better way to test these kinds of cases?

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing the Use of TransactionScope

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

    Read the article

  • Testing ActionMailer's receive method (Rails)

    - by Brian Armstrong
    There is good documentation out there on testing ActionMailer send methods which deliver mail. But I'm unable to figure out how to test a receive method that is used to parse incoming mail. I want to do something like this: require 'test_helper' class ReceiverTest < ActionMailer::TestCase test "parse incoming mail" do email = TMail::Mail.parse(File.open("test/fixtures/emails/example1.txt",'r').read) assert_difference "ProcessedMail.count" do Receiver.receive email end end end But I get the following error on the line which calls Receiver.receive NoMethodError: undefined method `index' for #<TMail::Mail:0x102c4a6f0> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/tmail-1.2.7.1/lib/tmail/stringio.rb:128:in `gets' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/tmail-1.2.7.1/lib/tmail/mail.rb:392:in `parse_header' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/tmail-1.2.7.1/lib/tmail/mail.rb:139:in `initialize' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/tmail-1.2.7.1/lib/tmail/stringio.rb:43:in `open' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/tmail-1.2.7.1/lib/tmail/port.rb:340:in `ropen' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/tmail-1.2.7.1/lib/tmail/mail.rb:138:in `initialize' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/tmail-1.2.7.1/lib/tmail/mail.rb:123:in `new' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/tmail-1.2.7.1/lib/tmail/mail.rb:123:in `parse' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionmailer-2.3.4/lib/action_mailer/base.rb:417:in `receive' Tmail is parsing the test file I have correctly. So that's not it. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing an Event Firing From a Thread

    - by Dougc
    I'm having a problem unit testing a class which fires events when a thread starts and finishes. A cut down version of the offending source is as follows: public class ThreadRunner { private bool keepRunning; public event EventHandler Started; public event EventHandler Finished; public void StartThreadTest() { this.keepRunning = true; var thread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(this.LongRunningMethod)); thread.Start(); } public void FinishThreadTest() { this.keepRunning = false; } protected void OnStarted() { if (this.Started != null) this.Started(this, new EventArgs()); } protected void OnFinished() { if (this.Finished != null) this.Finished(this, new EventArgs()); } private void LongRunningMethod() { this.OnStarted(); while (this.keepRunning) Thread.Sleep(100); this.OnFinished(); } } I then have a test to check that the Finished event fires after the LongRunningMethod has finished as follows: [TestClass] public class ThreadRunnerTests { [TestMethod] public void CheckFinishedEventFiresTest() { var threadTest = new ThreadRunner(); bool finished = false; object locker = new object(); threadTest.Finished += delegate(object sender, EventArgs e) { lock (locker) { finished = true; Monitor.Pulse(locker); } }; threadTest.StartThreadTest(); threadTest.FinishThreadTest(); lock (locker) { Monitor.Wait(locker, 1000); Assert.IsTrue(finished); } } } So the idea here being that the test will block for a maximum of one second - or until the Finish event is fired - before checking whether the finished flag is set. Clearly I've done something wrong as sometimes the test will pass, sometimes it won't. Debugging seems very difficult as well as the breakpoints I'd expect to be hit (the OnFinished method, for example) don't always seem to be. I'm assuming this is just my misunderstanding of the way threading works, so hopefully someone can enlighten me.

    Read the article

  • Rx Reactive extensions: Unit testing with FromAsyncPattern

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

    Read the article

  • Testing injected dependencies into your struts2 actions

    - by Barry
    Hi, I am wondering how others might have accomplished this. I found in the Spring documentation @required which I attempted to use in a 'test' but got this stmt INFO XmlConfigurationProvider:380 - Unable to verify action class [xxx] exists at initialization I have found another way in spring to do this is to write custom init methods and declare those on the bean but it almost seems like this is a strange thing to do to a struts2 action. In my application I inject through spring different web services (via setter injection) into different actions. I want to ensure on startup these are not null and set.

    Read the article

  • How to make efficient code emerge through unit testing

    - by Jean
    Hi, I participate in a TDD Coding Dojo, where we try to practice pure TDD on simple problems. It occured to me however that the code which emerges from the unit tests isn't the most efficient. Now this is fine most of the time, but what if the code usage grows so that efficiency becomes a problem. I love the way the code emerges from unit testing, but is it possible to make the efficiency property emerge through further tests ? Here is a trivial example in ruby: prime factorization. I followed a pure TDD approach making the tests pass one after the other validating my original acceptance test (commented at the bottom). What further steps could I take, if I wanted to make one of the generic prime factorization algorithms emerge ? To reduce the problem domain, let's say I want to get a quadratic sieve implementation ... Now in this precise case I know the "optimal algorithm, but in most cases, the client will simply add a requirement that the feature runs in less than "x" time for a given environment. require 'shoulda' require 'lib/prime' class MathTest < Test::Unit::TestCase context "The math module" do should "have a method to get primes" do assert Math.respond_to? 'primes' end end context "The primes method of Math" do should "return [] for 0" do assert_equal [], Math.primes(0) end should "return [1] for 1 " do assert_equal [1], Math.primes(1) end should "return [1,2] for 2" do assert_equal [1,2], Math.primes(2) end should "return [1,3] for 3" do assert_equal [1,3], Math.primes(3) end should "return [1,2] for 4" do assert_equal [1,2,2], Math.primes(4) end should "return [1,5] for 5" do assert_equal [1,5], Math.primes(5) end should "return [1,2,3] for 6" do assert_equal [1,2,3], Math.primes(6) end should "return [1,3] for 9" do assert_equal [1,3,3], Math.primes(9) end should "return [1,2,5] for 10" do assert_equal [1,2,5], Math.primes(10) end end # context "Functionnal Acceptance test 1" do # context "the prime factors of 14101980 are 1,2,2,3,5,61,3853"do # should "return [1,2,3,5,61,3853] for ${14101980*14101980}" do # assert_equal [1,2,2,3,5,61,3853], Math.primes(14101980*14101980) # end # end # end end and the naive algorithm I created by this approach module Math def self.primes(n) if n==0 return [] else primes=[1] for i in 2..n do if n%i==0 while(n%i==0) primes<<i n=n/i end end end primes end end end

    Read the article

  • Mocking a concrete class : templates and avoiding conditional compilation

    - by AshirusNW
    I'm trying to testing a concrete object with this sort of structure. class Database { public: Database(Server server) : server_(server) {} int Query(const char* expression) { server_.Connect(); return server_.ExecuteQuery(); } private: Server server_; }; i.e. it has no virtual functions, let alone a well-defined interface. I want to a fake database which calls mock services for testing. Even worse, I want the same code to be either built against the real version or the fake so that the same testing code can both: Test the real Database implementation - for integration tests Test the fake implementation, which calls mock services To solve this, I'm using a templated fake, like this: #ifndef INTEGRATION_TESTS class FakeDatabase { public: FakeDatabase() : realDb_(mockServer_) {} int Query(const char* expression) { MOCK_EXPECT_CALL(mockServer_, Query, 3); return realDb_.Query(); } private: // in non-INTEGRATION_TESTS builds, Server is a mock Server with // extra testing methods that allows mocking Server mockServer_; Database realDb_; }; #endif template <class T> class TestDatabaseContainer { public: int Query(const char* expression) { int result = database_.Query(expression); std::cout << "LOG: " << result << endl; return result; } private: T database_; }; Edit: Note the fake Database must call the real Database (but with a mock Server). Now to switch between them I'm planning the following test framework: class DatabaseTests { public: #ifdef INTEGRATION_TESTS typedef TestDatabaseContainer<Database> TestDatabase ; #else typedef TestDatabaseContainer<FakeDatabase> TestDatabase ; #endif TestDatabase& GetDb() { return _testDatabase; } private: TestDatabase _testDatabase; }; class QueryTestCase : public DatabaseTests { public: void TestStep1() { ASSERT(GetDb().Query(static_cast<const char *>("")) == 3); return; } }; I'm not a big fan of that compile-time switching between the real and the fake. So, my question is: Whether there's a better way of switching between Database and FakeDatabase? For instance, is it possible to do it at runtime in a clean fashion? I like to avoid #ifdefs. Also, if anyone has a better way of making a fake class that mimics a concrete class, I'd appreciate it. I don't want to have templated code all over the actual test code (QueryTestCase class). Feel free to critique the code style itself, too. You can see a compiled version of this code on codepad.

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing iPhone Code That Uses NSLocalizedString

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

    Read the article

  • Errors caught by WBT, but not BBT and vice versa

    - by David Relihan
    Hi Folks, Can you think of one type of error that might be found using White-Box testing, and one type using Black-Box testing. i.e. an error that would be found by one and not the other. For WBT there would null else statements, but what would you catch with BBT and not WBT??? BTW this question is just based on my own personal study - I'm not getting free marks out of this!!!! Thanks,

    Read the article

  • iPhone + upgrade existing paid application on app store to free application with In App purchase + w

    - by pratik
    Hello, I have implemented In App purchase in my existing application. This application is currently available on app store as paid application, I want to update this paid application to free application with this In App purchase feature, where users can download it freely and have to pay for few features to unlock them. But the problem is that, if I update the existing paid application as free application (with few features locked and user has to buy it to unlock it), what about the users who have already purchased this application. Because when they will update to new free application, few features will be locked and they have to pay again to unlock them (why should they pay, if they have already purchased whole application previously). Regards, Pratik

    Read the article

  • Screen capture during testing

    - by Edwward
    This is an application for reviewing performance tests. Simple in concept, tricky to describe. Picture: 1) Recording interactions with a WPF program so the inputs can be played back. 2) Playing the inputs back while doing a continuous screen capture. 3) Capturing wall time as well as continuous CPU percentages during playback. 4) Repeating steps (2) and (3) lots of times. 5) Writing the relevant stuff out to files/db. 6) Reading it and putting it all in a fancy UI for easy review/analysis. The killer for me is (2). I could use some guidance on a good, possibly commercial, screen capture SDK. I would also welcome the news that my whole problem already has a solution. And of course any thoughts on the overall idea would also be great. Thanks. Ed

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing - Am I doing it right?

    - by baron
    Hi everyone, Basically I have been programing for a little while and after finishing my last project can fully understand how much easier it would have been if I'd have done TDD. I guess I'm still not doing it strictly as I am still writing code then writing a test for it, I don't quite get how the test becomes before the code if you don't know what structures and how your storing data etc... but anyway... Kind of hard to explain but basically lets say for example I have a Fruit objects with properties like id, color and cost. (All stored in textfile ignore completely any database logic etc) FruitID FruitName FruitColor FruitCost 1 Apple Red 1.2 2 Apple Green 1.4 3 Apple HalfHalf 1.5 This is all just for example. But lets say I have this is a collection of Fruit (it's a List<Fruit>) objects in this structure. And my logic will say to reorder the fruitids in the collection if a fruit is deleted (this is just how the solution needs to be). E.g. if 1 is deleted, object 2 takes fruit id 1, object 3 takes fruit id2. Now I want to test the code ive written which does the reordering, etc. How can I set this up to do the test? Here is where I've got so far. Basically I have fruitManager class with all the methods, like deletefruit, etc. It has the list usually but Ive changed hte method to test it so that it accepts a list, and the info on the fruit to delete, then returns the list. Unit-testing wise: Am I basically doing this the right way, or have I got the wrong idea? and then I test deleting different valued objects / datasets to ensure method is working properly. [Test] public void DeleteFruit() { var fruitList = CreateFruitList(); var fm = new FruitManager(); var resultList = fm.DeleteFruitTest("Apple", 2, fruitList); //Assert that fruitobject with x properties is not in list ? how } private static List<Fruit> CreateFruitList() { //Build test data var f01 = new Fruit {Name = "Apple",Id = 1, etc...}; var f02 = new Fruit {Name = "Apple",Id = 2, etc...}; var f03 = new Fruit {Name = "Apple",Id = 3, etc...}; var fruitList = new List<Fruit> {f01, f02, f03}; return fruitList; }

    Read the article

  • Embeddable unit testing framework for mixed Windows app

    - by Andy Dent
    I want to test portions of a very complex app which includes both a major native Windows component and a substantial WPF GUI. Due to complexities I can't detail, it is impossible to run the native portion independently nor can I isolate the areas I want to test (spare me the lectures, we're talking a huge legacy code base and we do have refactoring plans). I'm looking for a unit test kit I can invoke on the native side but must be able to run with the app launched with the managed portion initialised. That seems to rule out the run executable feature of the cfix Windows unit test kit. I really like their philosophy, like WinUnit, of using DLL compilation as a way to add the reflective capabilities missing in C++ and gain a more NUnit-like experience. Ideally, I want something like WinUnit running within the application code and generating an HTML report. I'm trying to introduce more TDD and having things as lean as possible is important.

    Read the article

  • Real-world SignalR example, ditching ghetto long polling

    - by Jeff
    One of the highlights of BUILD last week was the announcement that SignalR, a framework for real-time client to server (or cloud, if you will) communication, would be a real supported thing now with the weight of Microsoft behind it. Love the open source flava! If you aren’t familiar with SignalR, watch this BUILD session with PM Damian Edwards and dev David Fowler. Go ahead, I’ll wait. You’ll be in a happy place within the first ten minutes. If you skip to the end, you’ll see that they plan to ship this as a real first version by the end of the year. Insert slow clap here. Writing a few lines of code to move around a box from one browser to the next is a way cool demo, but how about something real-world? When learning new things, I find it difficult to be abstract, and I like real stuff. So I thought about what was in my tool box and the decided to port my crappy long-polling “there are new posts” feature of POP Forums to use SignalR. A few versions back, I added a feature where a button would light up while you were pecking out a reply if someone else made a post in the interim. It kind of saves you from that awkward moment where someone else posts some snark before you. While I was proud of the feature, I hated the implementation. When you clicked the reply button, it started polling an MVC URL asking if the last post you had matched the last one the server, and it did it every second and a half until you either replied or the server told you there was a new post, at which point it would display that button. The code was not glam: // in the reply setup PopForums.replyInterval = setInterval("PopForums.pollForNewPosts(" + topicID + ")", 1500); // called from the reply setup and the handler that fetches more posts PopForums.pollForNewPosts = function (topicID) { $.ajax({ url: PopForums.areaPath + "/Forum/IsLastPostInTopic/" + topicID, type: "GET", dataType: "text", data: "lastPostID=" + PopForums.currentTopicState.lastVisiblePost, success: function (result) { var lastPostLoaded = result.toLowerCase() == "true"; if (lastPostLoaded) { $("#MorePostsBeforeReplyButton").css("visibility", "hidden"); } else { $("#MorePostsBeforeReplyButton").css("visibility", "visible"); clearInterval(PopForums.replyInterval); } }, error: function () { } }); }; What’s going on here is the creation of an interval timer to keep calling the server and bugging it about new posts, and setting the visibility of a button appropriately. It looks like this if you’re monitoring requests in FireBug: Gross. The SignalR approach was to call a message broker when a reply was made, and have that broker call back to the listening clients, via a SingalR hub, to let them know about the new post. It seemed weird at first, but the server-side hub’s only method is to add the caller to a group, so new post notifications only go to callers viewing the topic where a new post was made. Beyond that, it’s important to remember that the hub is also the means to calling methods at the client end. Starting at the server side, here’s the hub: using Microsoft.AspNet.SignalR.Hubs; namespace PopForums.Messaging { public class Topics : Hub { public void ListenTo(int topicID) { Groups.Add(Context.ConnectionId, topicID.ToString()); } } } Have I mentioned how awesomely not complicated this is? The hub acts as the channel between the server and the client, and you’ll see how JavaScript calls the above method in a moment. Next, the broker class and its associated interface: using Microsoft.AspNet.SignalR; using Topic = PopForums.Models.Topic; namespace PopForums.Messaging { public interface IBroker { void NotifyNewPosts(Topic topic, int lasPostID); } public class Broker : IBroker { public void NotifyNewPosts(Topic topic, int lasPostID) { var context = GlobalHost.ConnectionManager.GetHubContext<Topics>(); context.Clients.Group(topic.TopicID.ToString()).notifyNewPosts(lasPostID); } } } The NotifyNewPosts method uses the static GlobalHost.ConnectionManager.GetHubContext<Topics>() method to get a reference to the hub, and then makes a call to clients in the group matched by the topic ID. It’s calling the notifyNewPosts method on the client. The TopicService class, which handles the reply data from the MVC controller, has an instance of the broker new’d up by dependency injection, so it took literally one line of code in the reply action method to get things moving. _broker.NotifyNewPosts(topic, post.PostID); The JavaScript side of things wasn’t much harder. When you click the reply button (or quote button), the reply window opens up and fires up a connection to the hub: var hub = $.connection.topics; hub.client.notifyNewPosts = function (lastPostID) { PopForums.setReplyMorePosts(lastPostID); }; $.connection.hub.start().done(function () { hub.server.listenTo(topicID); }); The important part to look at here is the creation of the notifyNewPosts function. That’s the method that is called from the server in the Broker class above. Conversely, once the connection is done, the script calls the listenTo method on the server, letting it know that this particular connection is listening for new posts on this specific topic ID. This whole experiment enables a lot of ideas that would make the forum more Facebook-like, letting you know when stuff is going on around you.

    Read the article

  • Implementing Unit Testing on the iPhone

    - by james.ingham
    Hi, So I've followed this tutorial to setup unit testing on my app when I got a little stuck. At bullet point 8 in that tutorial it shows this image, which is what I should be expecting when I build: However this isn't what I get when I build. I get this error message: Command /bin/sh failed with exit code 1 as well as the error message the unit test has created. Then, when I expand on the first error I get this: PhaseScriptExecution "Run Script" "build/3D Pool.build/Debug-iphonesimulator/LogicTests.build/Script-1A6BA6AE10F28F40008AC2A8.sh" cd "/Users/james/Desktop/FYP/3D Pool" setenv ACTION build setenv ALTERNATE_GROUP staff ... setenv XCODE_VERSION_MAJOR 0300 setenv XCODE_VERSION_MINOR 0320 setenv YACC /Developer/usr/bin/yacc /bin/sh -c "\"/Users/james/Desktop/FYP/3D Pool/build/3D Pool.build/Debug-iphonesimulator/LogicTests.build/Script-1A6BA6AE10F28F40008AC2A8.sh\"" /Developer/Tools/RunPlatformUnitTests.include:412: note: Started tests for architectures 'i386' /Developer/Tools/RunPlatformUnitTests.include:419: note: Running tests for architecture 'i386' (GC OFF) objc[12589]: GC: forcing GC OFF because OBJC_DISABLE_GC is set Test Suite '/Users/james/Desktop/FYP/3D Pool/build/Debug-iphonesimulator/LogicTests.octest(Tests)' started at 2010-01-04 21:05:06 +0000 Test Suite 'LogicTests' started at 2010-01-04 21:05:06 +0000 Test Case '-[LogicTests testFail]' started. /Users/james/Desktop/FYP/3D Pool/LogicTests.m:17: error: -[LogicTests testFail] : Must fail to succeed. Test Case '-[LogicTests testFail]' failed (0.000 seconds). Test Suite 'LogicTests' finished at 2010-01-04 21:05:06 +0000. Executed 1 test, with 1 failure (0 unexpected) in 0.000 (0.000) seconds Test Suite '/Users/james/Desktop/FYP/3D Pool/build/Debug-iphonesimulator/LogicTests.octest(Tests)' finished at 2010-01-04 21:05:06 +0000. Executed 1 test, with 1 failure (0 unexpected) in 0.000 (0.002) seconds /Developer/Tools/RunPlatformUnitTests.include:448: error: Failed tests for architecture 'i386' (GC OFF) /Developer/Tools/RunPlatformUnitTests.include:462: note: Completed tests for architectures 'i386' Command /bin/sh failed with exit code 1 Now this is very odd as it is running the tests (and succeeding as you can see my STFail firing) because if I add a different test which passes I get no errors, so the tests are working fine. But why am I getting this extra build fail? It may also be of note that when downloading solutions/templates which should work out the box, I get the same error. I'm guessing I've set something up wrong here but I've just followed a tutorial 100% correctly!! If anyone could help I'd be very grateful! Thanks EDIT: According to this blog, this post and a few other websites, I'm not the only one getting this problem. It has been like this since the release of xCode 3.2, assuming the apple dev center documents and tutorials etc are pre-3.2 as well. However some say its a known issue whereas others seem to think this was intentional. I for one would like both the extended console and in code messages, and I certainly do not like the "Command /bin/sh..." error and really think they would have documented such an update. Hopefully it will be fixed soon anyway. UPDATE: Here's confirmation it's something changed since the release of xCode 3.2.1. This image: is from my test build using 3.2.1. This one is from an older version (3.1.4): . (The project for both was unchanged).

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >