Search Results

Search found 19211 results on 769 pages for 'ui automated testing'.

Page 33/769 | < Previous Page | 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40  | Next Page >

  • Jquery UI Dialog - when opened IE7 Browser moves instantly to the bottom of the page

    - by Truegilly
    Hello, i have been working on a new .net MVC site and have integrated some of the awesome jquery UI components. ive been testing it in IE8, FF, opera and Chrome and all looks well. Once I test in IE7, surprisingly its the dialogs that are causing a problem. basically what’s happening is that one you user clicks to open a dialog the page will scroll immediately to the bottom of the page. This is especially bad if the page is quite long. this only happens in IE7 (and probably 6 but im not even going there!). I have spend a few hours reading forums and it seems im not the only one. I have created a dirty hack which im not keen on but it does work. onclick="SignIn(); <% if(ModelHelperClass.CheckForOldIEVersion() == true) Response.Write("window.scrollTo(0, 0);"); %> return false;"> has anyone else had this issue and resolved it without resorting to dirty hacks ? im using jquery-ui-1.8.custom.min.js and jquery-1.4.2.min.js any help is most appreciated Truegilly

    Read the article

  • Generating JavaScript in C# and subsequent testing

    - by Codebrain
    We are currently developing an ASP.NET MVC application which makes heavy use of attribute-based metadata to drive the generation of JavaScript. Below is a sample of the type of methods we are writing: function string GetJavascript<T>(string javascriptPresentationFunctionName, string inputId, T model) { return @"function updateFormInputs(value){ $('#" + inputId + @"_SelectedItemState').val(value); $('#" + inputId + @"_Presentation').val(value); } function clearInputs(){ " + helper.ClearHiddenInputs<T>(model) + @" updateFormInputs(''); } function handleJson(json){ clearInputs(); " + helper.UpdateHiddenInputsWithJson<T>("json", model) + @" updateFormInputs(" + javascriptPresentationFunctionName + @"()); " + model.GetCallBackFunctionForJavascript("json") + @" }"; } This method generates some boilerplace and hands off to various other methods which return strings. The whole lot is then returned as a string and written to the output. The question(s) I have are: 1) Is there a nicer way to do this other than using large string blocks? We've considered using a StringBuilder or the Response Stream but it seems quite 'noisy'. Using string.format starts to become difficult to comprehend. 2) How would you go about unit testing this code? It seems a little amateur just doing a string comparison looking for particular output in the string. 3) What about actually testing the eventual JavaScript output? Thanks for your input!

    Read the article

  • Testing performance of queries in mysl

    - by Unreason
    I am trying to setup a script that would test performance of queries on a development mysql server. Here are more details: I have root access I am the only user accessing the server Mostly interested in InnoDB performance The queries I am optimizing are mostly search queries (SELECT ... LIKE '%xy%') What I want to do is to create reliable testing environment for measuring the speed of a single query, free from dependencies on other variables. Till now I have been using SQL_NO_CACHE, but sometimes the results of such tests also show caching behaviour - taking much longer to execute on the first run and taking less time on subsequent runs. If someone can explain this behaviour in full detail I might stick to using SQL_NO_CACHE; I do believe that it might be due to file system cache and/or caching of indexes used to execute the query, as this post explains. It is not clear to me when Buffer Pool and Key Buffer get invalidated or how they might interfere with testing. So, short of restarting mysql server, how would you recommend to setup an environment that would be reliable in determining if one query performs better then the other?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC unit testing

    - by Simon Lomax
    Hi, I'm getting started with unit testing and trying to do some TDD. I've read a fair bit about the subject and written a few tests. I just want to know if the following is the right approach. I want to add the usual "contact us" facility on my web site. You know the thing, the user fills out a form with their email address, enters a brief message and hits a button to post the form back. The model binders do their stuff and my action method accepts the posted data as a model. The action method would then parse the model and use smtp to send an email to the web site administrator infoming him/her that somebody filled out the contact form on their site. Now for the question .... In order to test this, would I be right in creating an interface IDeliver that has a method Send(emailAddress, message) to accept the email address and message body. Implement the inteface in a concrete class and let that class deal with smtp stuff and actually send the mail. If I add the inteface as a parameter to my controller constructor I can then use DI and IoC to inject the concrete class into the controller. But when unit testing I can create a fake or mock version of my IDeliver and do assertions on that. The reason I ask is that I've seen other examples of people generating interfaces for SmtpClient and then mocking that. Is there really any need to go that far or am I not understanding this stuff?

    Read the article

  • Automatic testing of GUI related private methods

    - by Stein G. Strindhaug
    When it comes to GUI programming (at least for web) I feel that often the only thing that would be useful to unit test is some of the private methods*. While unit testing makes perfect sense for back-end code, I feel it doesn't quite fit the GUI classes. What is the best way to add automatic testing of these? * Why I think the only methods useful to test is private: Often when I write GUI classes they don't even have any public methods except for the constructor. The public methods if any is trivial, and the constructor does most of the job calling private methods. They receive some data from server does a lot of trivial output and feeds data to the constructor of other classes contained inside it, adding listeners that calls a (more or less directly) calls the server... Most of it pretty trivial (the hardest part is the layout: css, IE, etc.) but sometimes I create some private method that does some advanced tricks, which I definitely do not want to be publicly visible (because it's closely coupled to the implementation of the layout, and likely to change), but is sufficiently complicated to break. These are often only called by the constructor or repeatedly by events in the code, not by any public methods at all. I'd like to have a way to test this type of methods, without making it public or resorting to reflection trickery. (BTW: I'm currently using GWT, but I feel this applies to most languages/frameworks I've used when coding for GUI)

    Read the article

  • Testing subpackage modules in Python 3

    - by Mitchell Model
    I have been experimenting with various uses of hierarchies like this and the differences between absolute and relative imports, and can't figure out how to do routine things with the package, subpackages, and modules without simply putting everything on sys.path. I have a two-level package hierarchy: MyApp __init__.py Application __init__.py Module1 Module2 ... Domain __init__.py Module1 Module2 ... UI __init__.py Module1 Module2 ... I want to be able to do the following: Run test code in a Module's "if main" when the module imports from other modules in the same directory. Have one or more test code modules in each subpackage that runs unit tests on the modules in the subpackage. Have a set of unit tests that reside in someplace reasonable, but outside the subpackages, either in a sibling package, at the top-level package, or outside the top-level package (though all these might end up doing is running the tests in each subpackage) "Enter" the structure from any of the three subpackage levels, e.g. run code that just uses Domain modules, run code that just uses Application modules, but Application uses code from both Application and Domain modules, and run code from GUI uses code from both GUI and Application; for instance, Application test code would import Application modules but not Domain modules. After developing the bulk of the code without subpackages, continue developing and testing after organizing the modules into this hierarchy. I know how to use relative imports so that external code that puts MyApp on its sys.path can import MyApp, import any subpackages it wants, and import things from their modules, while the modules in each subpackage can import other modules from the same subpackage or from sibling packages. However, the development needs listed above seem incompatible with subpackage structuring -- in other words, I can't have it both ways: a well-structured multi-level package hierarchy used from the outside and also used from within, in particular for testing but also because modules from one design level (in particular the UI) should not import modules from a design level below the next one down. Sorry for the long essay, but I think it fairly represents the struggles a lot of people have been having adopting to the new relative import mechanisms.

    Read the article

  • Unit testing with Mocks. Test behaviour not implementation

    - by Kenny Eliasson
    Hi.. I always had a problem when unit testing classes that calls other classes, for example I have a class that creates a new user from a phone-number then saves it to the database and sends a SMS to the number provided. Like the code provided below. public class UserRegistrationProcess : IUserRegistration { private readonly IRepository _repository; private readonly ISmsService _smsService; public UserRegistrationProcess(IRepository repository, ISmsService smsService) { _repository = repository; _smsService = smsService; } public void Register(string phone) { var user = new User(phone); _repository.Save(user); _smsService.Send(phone, "Welcome", "Message!"); } } It is a really simple class but how would you go about and test it? At the moment im using Mocks but I dont really like it [Test] public void WhenRegistreringANewUser_TheNewUserIsSavedToTheDatabase() { var repository = new Mock<IRepository>(); var smsService = new Mock<ISmsService>(); var userRegistration = new UserRegistrationProcess(repository.Object, smsService.Object); var phone = "0768524440"; userRegistration.Register(phone); repository.Verify(x => x.Save(It.Is<User>(user => user.Phone == phone)), Times.Once()); } [Test] public void WhenRegistreringANewUser_ItWillSendANewSms() { var repository = new Mock<IRepository>(); var smsService = new Mock<ISmsService>(); var userRegistration = new UserRegistrationProcess(repository.Object, smsService.Object); var phone = "0768524440"; userRegistration.Register(phone); smsService.Verify(x => x.Send(phone, It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>()), Times.Once()); } It feels like I am testing the wrong thing here? Any thoughts on how to make this better?

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing-- fundamental goal?

    - by David
    Me and my co-workers had a bit of a disagreement last night about unit testing in our PHP/MySQL application. Half of us argued that when unit testing a function within a class, you should mock everything outside of that class and its parents. The other half of us argued that you SHOULDN'T mock anything that is a direct dependancy of the class either. The specific example was our logging mechanism, which happened through a static Logging class, and we had a number of Logging::log() calls in various locations throughout our application. The first half of us said the Logging mechanism should be faked (mocked) because it would be tested in the Logging unit tests. The second half of us argued that we should include the original Logging class in our unit test so that if we make a change to our logging interface, we'll be able to see if it creates problems in other parts of the application due to failing to update the call interface. So I guess the fundamental question is-- do unit tests serve to test the functionality of a single unit in a closed environment, or show the consequences of changes to a single unit in a larger environment? If it's one of these, how do you accomplish the other?

    Read the article

  • jQuery UI sortable - sorting images

    - by GSTAR
    I've just implemented the jQuery UI sortable plugin for a set of images. The markup I have is as follows: <ul id="images" class="ui-sortable"> <li id="7884029"><img src="/images/member/4698568/7884029_t.jpg" alt="" /></li> <li id="7379458"><img src="/images/member/4698568/7379458_t.jpg" alt="" /></li> <li id="1704208"><img src="/images/member/4698568/1704208_t.jpg" alt="" /></li> <li id="1750715"><img src="/images/member/4698568/1750715_t.jpg" alt="" /></li> <li id="4364912"><img src="/images/member/4698568/4364912_t.png" alt="" /></li> </ul> <script type="text/javascript"> /*<![CDATA[*/ jQuery(function($) { jQuery('#images').sortable({'delay':'100'}); }); /*]]>*/ </script> The LI id is the 'name' column in the DB table - I prefer not to display the ID column. Now my question is how do I capture the sorting? I understand this would be an AJAX request but I have no idea how to do it. I have set up a sort_order column in my DB table and I am using PHP as my scripting language. I could do with a code example. EDIT: Ideally I prefer if the sort order is applied upon moving an item, i.e. I do not want to enclose it all in a form.

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing Private Method in Resource Managing Class (C++)

    - by BillyONeal
    I previously asked this question under another name but deleted it because I didn't explain it very well. Let's say I have a class which manages a file. Let's say that this class treats the file as having a specific file format, and contains methods to perform operations on this file: class Foo { std::wstring fileName_; public: Foo(const std::wstring& fileName) : fileName_(fileName) { //Construct a Foo here. }; int getChecksum() { //Open the file and read some part of it //Long method to figure out what checksum it is. //Return the checksum. } }; Let's say I'd like to be able to unit test the part of this class that calculates the checksum. Unit testing the parts of the class that load in the file and such is impractical, because to test every part of the getChecksum() method I might need to construct 40 or 50 files! Now lets say I'd like to reuse the checksum method elsewhere in the class. I extract the method so that it now looks like this: class Foo { std::wstring fileName_; static int calculateChecksum(const std::vector<unsigned char> &fileBytes) { //Long method to figure out what checksum it is. } public: Foo(const std::wstring& fileName) : fileName_(fileName) { //Construct a Foo here. }; int getChecksum() { //Open the file and read some part of it return calculateChecksum( something ); } void modifyThisFileSomehow() { //Perform modification int newChecksum = calculateChecksum( something ); //Apply the newChecksum to the file } }; Now I'd like to unit test the calculateChecksum() method because it's easy to test and complicated, and I don't care about unit testing getChecksum() because it's simple and very difficult to test. But I can't test calculateChecksum() directly because it is private. Does anyone know of a solution to this problem?

    Read the article

  • How to link jQuery UI datepicker functionality with a select list

    - by take2
    I'm trying to connect jQuery UI's datepicker with a select list. I have found one explanation on jQuery's Forum ( forum.jquery.com/topic/jquery-ui-datepicker-with-select-lists), but I can't get it working. There are input and select list both declared: <select id="selectMonth"><option value="01">Jan</option><option value="02">Feb</option> <option value="03">Mar</option><option value="04">Apr</option>...</select> <select id="selectDay"><option value="01">1</option><option value="02">2</option> <option value="03">3</option><option value="04">4</option>...</select> <select id="selectYear"><option value="2012">2012</option><option value="2013">2013</option> <option value="2014">2014</option>...</select> <p>Date: <input type="text" id="selectedDatepicker" /></p> This is the script: $(function() { $('#selectedDatepicker').datepicker({ beforeShow: readSelected, onSelect: updateSelected, minDate: new Date(2012, 1 - 1, 1), maxDate: new Date(2014, 12 - 1, 31), showOn: 'both', buttonImageOnly: true, buttonImage: 'img/calendar.gif'}); // Prepare to show a date picker linked to three select controls function readSelected() { $('#selectedDatepicker').val($('#selectMonth').val() + '/' + $('#selectDay').val() + '/' + $('#selectYear').val()); return {}; } // Update three select controls to match a date picker selection function updateSelected(date) { $('#selectMonth').val(date.substring(0, 2)); $('#selectDay').val(date.substring(3, 5)); $('#selectYear').val(date.substring(6, 10)); } }); And here is the fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/xKXZm/ They are not connected properly, the only "connected behaviour" is that when you click on the input button, it picks up the value of the select list. On the other hand, the select list never picks up the value of the input nor will the input pick up the value of the select list until you click on it.

    Read the article

  • What is the purpose of unit testing an interface repository

    - by ahsteele
    I am unit testing an ICustomerRepository interface used for retrieving objects of type Customer. As a unit test what value am I gaining by testing the ICustomerRepository in this manner? Under what conditions would the below test fail? For tests of this nature is it advisable to do tests that I know should fail? i.e. look for id 4 when I know I've only placed 5 in the repository I am probably missing something obvious but it seems the integration tests of the class that implements ICustomerRepository will be of more value. [TestClass] public class CustomerTests : TestClassBase { private Customer SetUpCustomerForRepository() { return new Customer() { CustId = 5, DifId = "55", CustLookupName = "The Dude", LoginList = new[] { new Login { LoginCustId = 5, LoginName = "tdude" }, new Login { LoginCustId = 5, LoginName = "tdude2" } } }; } [TestMethod] public void CanGetCustomerById() { // arrange var customer = SetUpCustomerForRepository(); var repository = Stub<ICustomerRepository>(); // act repository.Stub(rep => rep.GetById(5)).Return(customer); // assert Assert.AreEqual(customer, repository.GetById(5)); } } Test Base Class public class TestClassBase { protected T Stub<T>() where T : class { return MockRepository.GenerateStub<T>(); } } ICustomerRepository and IRepository public interface ICustomerRepository : IRepository<Customer> { IList<Customer> FindCustomers(string q); Customer GetCustomerByDifID(string difId); Customer GetCustomerByLogin(string loginName); } public interface IRepository<T> { void Save(T entity); void Save(List<T> entity); bool Save(T entity, out string message); void Delete(T entity); T GetById(int id); ICollection<T> FindAll(); }

    Read the article

  • Framework or tool for "distributed unit testing"?

    - by user262646
    Is there any tool or framework able to make it easier to test distributed software written in Java? My system under test is a peer-to-peer software, and I'd like to perform testing using something like PNUnit, but with Java instead of .Net. The system under test is a framework I'm developing to build P2P applications. It uses JXTA as a lower subsystem, trying to hide some complexities of it. It's currently an academic project, so I'm pursuing simplicity at this moment. In my test, I want to demonstrate that a peer (running in its own process, possibly with multiple threads) can discover another one (running in another process or even another machine) and that they can exchange a few messages. I'm not using mocks nor stubs because I need to see both sides working simultaneously. I realize that some kind of coordination mechanism is needed, and PNUnit seems to be able to do that. I've bumped into some initiatives like Pisces, which "aims to provide a distributed testing environment that extends JUnit, giving the developer/tester an ability to run remote JUnits and create complex test suites that are composed of several remote JUnit tests running in parallel or serially", but this project and a few others I have found seem to be long dead.

    Read the article

  • Best practice for debug Asserts during Unit testing

    - by Steve Steiner
    Does heavy use of unit tests discourage the use of debug asserts? It seems like a debug assert firing in the code under test implies the unit test shouldn't exist or the debug assert shouldn't exist. "There can be only one" seems like a reasonable principle. Is this the common practice? Or do you disable your debug asserts when unit testing, so they can be around for integration testing? Edit: I updated 'Assert' to debug assert to distinguish an assert in the code under test from the lines in the unit test that check state after the test has run. Also here is an example that I believe shows the dilema: A unit test passes invalid inputs for a protected function that asserts it's inputs are valid. Should the unit test not exist? It's not a public function. Perhaps checking the inputs would kill perf? Or should the assert not exist? The function is protected not private so it should be checking it's inputs for safety.

    Read the article

  • C++ and Dependency Injection in unit testing

    - by lhumongous
    Suppose I have a C++ class like so: class A { public: A() { } void SetNewB( const B& _b ) { m_B = _b; } private: B m_B; } In order to unit test something like this, I would have to break A's dependency on B. Since class A holds onto an actual object and not a pointer, I would have to refactor this code to take a pointer. Additionally, I would need to create a parent interface class for B so I can pass in my own fake of B when I test SetNewB. In this case, doesn't unit testing with dependency injection further complicate the existing code? If I make B a pointer, I'm now introducing heap allocation, and some piece of code is now responsible for cleaning it up (unless I use ref counted pointers). Additionally, if B is a rather trivial class with only a couple of member variables and functions, why introduce a whole new interface for it instead of just testing with an instance of B? I suppose you could make the argument that it would be easier to refactor A by using an interface. But are there some cases where two classes might need to be tightly coupled?

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing - Algorithm or Sample based ?

    - by ohadsc
    Say I'm trying to test a simple Set class public IntSet : IEnumerable<int> { Add(int i) {...} //IEnumerable implementation... } And suppose I'm trying to test that no duplicate values can exist in the set. My first option is to insert some sample data into the set, and test for duplicates using my knowledge of the data I used, for example: //OPTION 1 void InsertDuplicateValues_OnlyOneInstancePerValueShouldBeInTheSet() { var set = new IntSet(); //3 will be added 3 times var values = new List<int> {1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5}; foreach (int i in values) set.Add(i); //I know 3 is the only candidate to appear multiple times int counter = 0; foreach (int i in set) if (i == 3) counter++; Assert.AreEqual(1, counter); } My second option is to test for my condition generically: //OPTION 2 void InsertDuplicateValues_OnlyOneInstancePerValueShouldBeInTheSet() { var set = new IntSet(); //The following could even be a list of random numbers with a duplicate var values = new List<int> { 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5}; foreach (int i in values) set.Add(i); //I am not using my prior knowledge of the sample data //the following line would work for any data CollectionAssert.AreEquivalent(new HashSet<int>(values), set); } Of course, in this example, I conveniently have a set implementation to check against, as well as code to compare collections (CollectionAssert). But what if I didn't have either ? This is the situation when you are testing your real life custom business logic. Granted, testing for expected conditions generically covers more cases - but it becomes very similar to implementing the logic again (which is both tedious and useless - you can't use the same code to check itself!). Basically I'm asking whether my tests should look like "insert 1, 2, 3 then check something about 3" or "insert 1, 2, 3 and check for something in general" EDIT - To help me understand, please state in your answer if you prefer OPTION 1 or OPTION 2 (or neither, or that it depends on the case, etc )

    Read the article

  • Unit testing a 'legacy' WPF Application

    - by sc_ray
    The product I have been working on has been in development for the past six years. It started as a generic data entry portal into an insanely complex part WPF/part legacy application. The system has been developed for all these years without a single Unit test in its fold. Now, the point has been raised for a comprehensive unit testing framework. I have been recruited recently to work on this product and have been tasked to get the 'Testing' in order. Since the team that worked on the product for the last six years adopted 'Agile', the project lacks any documentation of the business rules or any design documents. I have been trying to write unit tests for some of the modules. But I am not sure what to Mock, how to setup my Test fixture and eventually what to Test for, since a casual glance of the methods does not reveal its intentions. Also, it has come to my attention that the code was not developed with a particular methodology in mind. Given the situation, I was wondering if the good people of Stackoverflow could provide me with some advise on how to salvage this situation. I have heard about the book 'Working with Legacy Code' that has something to say about this general situation but I was thinking about getting some pointers from individuals who have encountered similar situations within the technology stack(C#,VB,C++,.NET 3.5,WCF,SQL Server 2005).

    Read the article

  • Kendo UI Mobile with Knockout for Master-Detail Views

    - by Steve Michelotti
    Lately I’ve been playing with Kendo UI Mobile to build iPhone apps. It’s similar to jQuery Mobile in that they are both HTML5/JavaScript based frameworks for buildings mobile apps. The primary thing that drew me to investigate Kendo UI was its innate ability to adaptively render a native looking app based on detecting the device it’s currently running on. In other words, it will render to look like a native iPhone app if it’s running on an iPhone and it will render to look like a native Droid app if it’s running on a Droid. This is in contrast to jQuery Mobile which looks the same on all devices and, therefore, it can never quite look native for whatever device it’s running on. My first impressions of Kendo UI were great. Using HTML5 data-* attributes to define “roles” for UI elements is easy, the rendering looked great, and the basic navigation was simple and intuitive. However, I ran into major confusion when trying to figure out how to “correctly” build master-detail views. Since I was already very family with KnockoutJS, I set out to use that framework in conjunction with Kendo UI Mobile to build the following simple scenario: I wanted to have a simple “Task Manager” application where my first screen just showed a list of tasks like this:   Then clicking on a specific task would navigate to a detail screen that would show all details of the specific task that was selected:   Basic navigation between views in Kendo UI is simple. The href of an <a> tag just needs to specify a hash tag followed by the ID of the view to navigate to as shown in this jsFiddle (notice the href of the <a> tag matches the id of the second view):   Direct link to jsFiddle: here. That is all well and good but the problem I encountered was: how to pass data between the views? Specifically, I need the detail view to display all the details of whichever task was selected. If I was doing this with my typical technique with KnockoutJS, I know exactly what I would do. First I would create a view model that had my collection of tasks and a property for the currently selected task like this: 1: function ViewModel() { 2: var self = this; 3: self.tasks = ko.observableArray(data); 4: self.selectedTask = ko.observable(null); 5: } Then I would bind my list of tasks to the unordered list - I would attach a “click” handler to each item (each <li> in the unordered list) so that it would select the “selectedTask” for the view model. The problem I found is this approach simply wouldn’t work for Kendo UI Mobile. It completely ignored the click handlers that I was trying to attach to the <a> tags – it just wanted to look at the href (at least that’s what I observed). But if I can’t intercept this, then *how* can I pass data or any context to the next view? The only thing I was able to find in the Kendo documentation is that you can pass query string arguments on the view name you’re specifying in the href. This enabled me to do the following: Specify the task ID in each href – something like this: <a href=”#taskDetail?id=3></a> Attach an “init method” (via the “data-show” attribute on the details view) that runs whenever the view is activated Inside this “init method”, grab the task ID passed from the query string to look up the item from my view model’s list of tasks in order to set the selected task I was able to get all that working with about 20 lines of JavaScript as shown in this jsFiddle. If you click on the Results tab, you can navigate between views and see the the detail screen is correctly binding to the selected item:   Direct link to jsFiddle: here.   With all that being done, I was very happy to get it working with the behavior I wanted. However, I have no idea if that is the “correct” way to do it or if there is a “better” way to do it. I know that Kendo UI comes with its own data binding framework but my preference is to be able to use (the well-documented) KnockoutJS since I’m already familiar with that framework rather than having to learn yet another new framework. While I think my solution above is probably “acceptable”, there are still a couple of things that bug me about it. First, it seems odd that I have to loop through my items to *find* my selected item based on the ID that was passed on the query string - normally, with Knockout I can just refer directly to my selected item from where it was used. Second, it didn’t feel exactly right that I had to rely on the “data-show” method of the details view to set my context – normally with Knockout, I could just attach a click handler to the <a> tag that was actually clicked by the user in order to set the “selected item.” I’m not sure if I’m being too picky. I know there are many people that have *way* more expertise in Kendo UI compared to me – I’d be curious to know if there are better ways to achieve the same results.

    Read the article

  • Scriptable user-interfaces/frameworks for automated UI testing

    - by AareP
    I'm planning on using scripting for automated UI testing. Main application is written in c#, and I want it to be scriptable, so I can do everything end-user can do, but programmatically. What do you think of software that provides an interface for scripting, like VBA macros in Excel? Can this be future of all programming, big and small? What is the best way to build such an interface for your own application, dll-based or by parsing own scripting language?

    Read the article

  • User input and Automated input seperation

    - by tpaksu
    I have a mysql db and I have an automation script which modifies the data inside once a day. And, these columns may have changed by an user manually. What is the best approach to make the system only update the automated data, not the manually edited ones? I mean yes, flagging the cell which is manually edited is one way to do it, but I want to know if there's another way to accomplish this? Just curiosity.

    Read the article

  • SEO Tips - Never Use an Automated Service For Search Engine Site Submission

    It's hard to visit a marketing related website without some company offering to submit your site to the search engines. Of course what many people don't realize is that you're not going to get into the SE's using these 'site submission tools' the only way to get into the search engine is for them to index your site after finding a link for your blog or website from a site that is in Google's or any other search engines results already. The bottom line is you should never pay for or use an automated search engine submission service.

    Read the article

  • Unit testing ASP.NET MVC 2 routes with areas bails out on AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas()

    - by Sandor Drieënhuizen
    I'm unit testing my routes in ASP.NET MVC 2. I'm using MSTest and I'm using areas as well. When I call AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas() however, it throws this exception: System.InvalidOperationException: System.InvalidOperationException: This method cannot be called during the application's pre-start initialization stage.. OK, so I reckon I can't call it from my class initializer. But when can I call it? I don't have an Application_Start in my test obviously.

    Read the article

  • Kendo UI TabStrip with MVC3

    - by Dheyvendaran
    I was working on Kendo UI Grid. I need to work with Grid TabStrip. When the user clicks on the tabstrip it should get the currently selected Id and navigate to the next page. Sample code items.Add().Text("Add New Details").Action("action","controller", new { Id = "#=Id#" }) Here the Current Id is not getting properly. It always shows "/#=Id#". Please tell me How can i get the current selected Id to the above action.

    Read the article

  • SAP Business One: Connection Error When I try to connect to UI API

    - by RedsDevils
    Hi All, I got this error message "Connection - Could not find SBO that match the connection string [66000-85]" when I try to connect SAP Business One UI API. I connect like the following : private void SetApplication() { SAPbouiCOM.SboGuiApi SboGuiApi = null; string sConnectionString = null; SboGuiApi = new SAPbouiCOM.SboGuiApi(); // connect to a running SBO Application sConnectionString = Environment.GetCommandLineArgs().GetValue(1).ToString() ; SboGuiApi.Connect(sConnectionString); SBO_Application = SboGuiApi.GetApplication(-1); }

    Read the article

  • Applescript file dialog with UI scripting

    - by Pepijn
    I am trying to open a file in a not so scriptable area of an application. I got halfway there by using UI scripting to select the proper menu item, but this opens a standard file dialog. How can I set the destination of the file dialog with Applescript?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40  | Next Page >