Search Results

Search found 14702 results on 589 pages for 'testing logic'.

Page 34/589 | < Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >

  • Unit-testing a directive with isolated scope and bidirectional value

    - by unludo
    I want to unit test a directive which looks like this: angular.module('myApp', []) .directive('myTest', function () { return { restrict: 'E', scope: { message: '='}, replace: true, template: '<div ng-if="message"><p>{{message}}</p></div>', link: function (scope, element, attrs) { } }; }); Here is my failing test: describe('myTest directive:', function () { var scope, compile, validHTML; validHTML = '<my-test message="message"></my-test>'; beforeEach(module('myApp')); beforeEach(inject(function($compile, $rootScope){ scope = $rootScope.$new(); compile = $compile; })); function create() { var elem, compiledElem; elem = angular.element(validHTML); compiledElem = compile(elem)(scope); scope.$digest(); return compiledElem; } it('should have a scope on root element', function () { scope.message = 'not empty'; var el = create(); console.log(el.text()); expect(el.text()).toBeDefined(); expect(el.text()).not.toBe(''); }); }); Can you spot why it's failing? The corresponding jsFiddle Thanks :)

    Read the article

  • Testing stored procedures

    - by giri
    Hi , How to test procedures with record type parameters.I have a procedure which takes test_ap ,basic and user_name as inputs.where test_ap is of record/row type,basic record array type and user_name charater varying. I need to test the procedure in pgadmin. test_client(test_ap test_base, basic test_base_detail[], user_name character varying) Any suggestions plz.

    Read the article

  • Unit testing nested subflows (subflows of subflows)

    - by snusmumrik
    I'm trying to write unit test for a flow, which has subflow, which, itself, has another subflow. I register first flow using FlowDefinitionResource getResource(FlowDefinitionResourceFactory resourceFactory). Then I register subflow definitions during test execution in FlowDefinitionRegistry before transitioning to them. Transitioning to "first level" subflow goes ok. The result of transitioning to subflow of current subflow - NoSuchFlowDefinitionException. The problem is that subflow definitions are all seem attached to the primary flow of the test and subflow can't be found within another subflow. Is there any way to attach subflow definition to another subflow in tests, which extend AbstractXmlFlowExecutionTests?

    Read the article

  • Grails unit testing and bootstrap

    - by tbruyelle
    I wrote an unit test for a controller. I have a Bootstrap file which alter the metaclass of domain classes by adding a method asPublicMap(). I use this method in the controller to return domain classes as json but only some selected public fields. My unit test failed because of MissingMethodException for asPublicMap(). As I understood, bootstrap classes are not loaded for unit tests, only for integration tests. That's why I got this error. My question is : Is there another place to put metaclass manipulation in order to take them into account during unit tests ?

    Read the article

  • Unit testing a functions whose purposes is side effects

    - by David
    How would you unit test do_int_to_string_conversion? #include <string> #include <iostream> void do_int_to_string_conversion(int i, std::string& s) { switch(i) { case 1: s="1"; break; case 2: s="2"; break; default: s ="Nix"; } std::cout << s << "\n"; } int main(int argc, char** argv){ std::string little_s; do_int_to_string_conversion(1, little_s); do_int_to_string_conversion(2, little_s); do_int_to_string_conversion(3, little_s); }

    Read the article

  • Testing variable types in Python

    - by Jasper
    Hello, I'm creating an initialising function for the class 'Room', and found that the program wouldn't accept the tests I was doing on the input variables. Why is this? def __init__(self, code, name, type, size, description, objects, exits): self.code = code self.name = name self.type = type self.size = size self.description = description self.objects = objects self.exits = exits #Check for input errors: if type(self.code) != type(str()): print 'Error found in module rooms.py!' print 'Error number: 110' elif type(self.name) != type(str()): print 'Error found in module rooms.py!' print 'Error number: 111' elif type(self.type) != type(str()): print 'Error found in module rooms.py!' print 'Error number: 112' elif type(self.size) != type(int()): print 'Error found in module rooms.py!' print 'Error number: 113' elif type(self.description) != type(str()): print 'Error found in module rooms.py!' print 'Error number: 114' elif type(self.objects) != type(list()): print 'Error found in module rooms.py!' print 'Error number: 115' elif type(self.exits) != type(tuple()): print 'Error found in module rooms.py!' print 'Error number: 116' When I run this I get this error: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/Users/Jasper/Development/Programming/MyProjects/Game Making Challenge/Europa I/rooms.py", line 148, in <module> myRoom = Room(101, 'myRoom', 'Basic Room', 5, '<insert description>', myObjects, myExits) File "/Users/Jasper/Development/Programming/MyProjects/Game Making Challenge/Europa I/rooms.py", line 29, in __init__ if type(self.code) != type(str()): TypeError: 'str' object is not callable

    Read the article

  • Testing a broken IP.

    - by wreing
    I'm trying to test an application and I need to make an valid IP not respond from a one of my test servers but not the others. I could do this for an fqdn using /etc/hosts but I'd like to do it for an IP. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Strategies for testing reactive, asynchronous code

    - by Arne
    I am developing a data-flow oriented domain-specific language. To simplify, let's just look at Operations. Operations have a number of named parameters and can be asked to compute their result using their current state. To decide when an Operation should produce a result, it gets a Decision that is sensitive to which parameter got a value from who. When this Decision decides that it is fulfilled, it emits a Signal using an Observer. An Accessor listens for this Signal and in turn calls the Result method of the Operation in order to multiplex it to the parameters of other Operations. So far, so good, nicely decoupled design, composable and reusable and, depending on the specific Observer used, as asynchronous as you want it to be. Now here's my problem: I would love to start coding actual Tests against this design. But with an asynchronous Observer... how should I know that the whole signal-and-parameters-plumbing worked? Do I need to use time outs while waiting for a Signal in order to say that it was emitted successfully or not? How can I be, formally, sure that the Signal will not be emitted if I just wait a little longer (halting problem? ;-)) And, how can I be sure that the Signal was emitted because it was me who set a parameter, and not another Operation? It might well be that my test comes to early and sees a Signal that was emitted way before my setting a parameter caused a Decision to emit it. Currently, I guess the trivial cases are easy to test, but as soon as I want to test complex many-to-many - situations between operations I must resort to hoping that the design Just Works (tm)...

    Read the article

  • C# InternalsVisibleTo() attribute for VBNET 2.0 while testing?

    - by Will Marcouiller
    I'm building an Active Directory wrapper in VBNET 2.0 (can't use later .NET) in which I have the following: IUtilisateur IGroupe IUniteOrganisation These interfaces are implemented in internal classes (Friend in VBNET), so that I want to implement a façade in order to instiate each of the interfaces with their internal classes. This will allow the architecture a better flexibility, etc. Now, I want to test these classes (Utilisateur, Groupe, UniteOrganisation) in a different project within the same solution. However, these classes are internal. I would like to be able to instantiate them without going through my façade, but only for these tests, nothing more. Here's a piece of code to illustrate it: public static class DirectoryFacade { public static IGroupe CreerGroupe() { return new Groupe(); } } // Then in code, I would write something alike: public partial class MainForm : Form { public MainForm() { IGroupe g = DirectoryFacade.CreerGroupe(); // Doing stuff with instance here... } } // My sample interface: public interface IGroupe { string Domaine { get; set; } IList<IUtilisateur> Membres { get; } } internal class Groupe : IGroupe { private IList<IUtilisateur> _membres; internal Groupe() { _membres = new List<IUtilisateur>(); } public string Domaine { get; set; } public IList<IUtilisateur> Membres { get { return _membres; } } } I heard of InternalsVisibleTo() attribute, recently. I was wondering whether it is available in VBNET 2.0/VS2005 so that I could access the assmebly's internal classes for my tests? Otherwise, how could I achieve this?

    Read the article

  • Android Service Testing with messages

    - by Sandeep Dhull
    I have a service which does its work(perform network operation) depending upon the type of message(message.what) property of the message. Then it returns the resoponse, also as a message to the requesting component(depending upon the message.replyTo). So, i am trying to write the testcases.. But how????? My Architecture of service is like this: 1) A component(ex. Activity) bounds to the service. 2) The component sends message to the Service(using Messenger). 3) The service has a nested class that handles the messages and execute the network call and returns a response as message to the sender(who initially sent the message and using its replyTo property). Now to test this.. i am using Junit test cases.. So , in that .. 1) in setUp() i am binding to the service.. 2) on testBusinessLogic() . i am sending the message to the service .. Now problem is where to get the response message.

    Read the article

  • Do You Know How OUM defines the four, basic types of business system testing performed on a project? Why not test your knowledge?

    - by user713452
    Testing is perhaps the most important process in the Oracle® Unified Method (OUM). That makes it all the more important for practitioners to have a common understanding of the various types of functional testing referenced in the method, and to use the proper terminology when communicating with each other about testing activities. OUM identifies four basic types of functional testing, which is sometimes referred to as business system testing.  The basic functional testing types referenced by OUM include: Unit Testing Integration Testing System Testing, and  Systems Integration Testing See if you can match the following definitions with the appropriate type above? A.  This type of functional testing is focused on verifying that interfaces/integration between the system being implemented (i.e. System under Discussion (SuD)) and external systems functions as expected. B.     This type of functional testing is performed for custom software components only, is typically performed by the developer of the custom software, and is focused on verifying that the several custom components developed to satisfy a given requirement (e.g. screen, program, report, etc.) interact with one another as designed. C.  This type of functional testing is focused on verifying that the functionality within the system being implemented (i.e. System under Discussion (SuD)), functions as expected.  This includes out-of-the -box functionality delivered with Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) applications, as well as, any custom components developed to address gaps in functionality.  D.  This type of functional testing is performed for custom software components only, is typically performed by the developer of the custom software, and is focused on verifying that the individual custom components developed to satisfy a given requirement  (e.g. screen, program, report, etc.) functions as designed.   Check your answers below: (D) (B) (C) (A) If you matched all of the functional testing types to their definitions correctly, then congratulations!  If not, you can find more information in the Testing Process Overview and Testing Task Overviews in the OUM Method Pack.

    Read the article

  • ISO 12207: Verification of integration and Unit test validation

    - by user970696
    I have received comments from the supervisor reviewing my thesis. He asked two questions I cannot answer right now: If ISO 12207 says under "Integration verification" that it "checks that components are correctly and completely integrated into a system", how this can be verified without testing, if all testing is validation? How without testing can I know that system is integrated correctly and fully? If unit testing is validation, how does it match the ISO definiton of validation "that requirements for intended use were fulfilled" if its so low level?

    Read the article

  • How to change the date/time in Python for all modules?

    - by Felix Schwarz
    When I write with business logic, my code often depends on the current time. For example the algorithm which looks at each unfinished order and checks if an invoice should be sent (which depends on the no of days since the job was ended). In these cases creating an invoice is not triggered by an explicit user action but by a background job. Now this creates a problem for me when it comes to testing: I can test invoice creation itself easily However it is hard to create an order in a test and check that the background job identifies the correct orders at the correct time. So far I found two solutions: In the test setup, calculate the job dates relative to the current date. Downside: The code becomes quite complicated as there are no explicit dates written anymore. Sometimes the business logic is pretty complex for edge cases so it becomes hard to debug due to all these relative dates. I have my own date/time accessor functions which I use throughout my code. In the test I just set a current date and all modules get this date. So I can simulate an order creation in February and check that the invoice is created in April easily. Downside: 3rd party modules do not use this mechanism so it's really hard to integrate+test these. The second approach was way more successful to me after all. Therefore I'm looking for a way to set the time Python's datetime+time modules return. Setting the date is usually enough, I don't need to set the current hour or second (even though this would be nice). Is there such a utility? Is there an (internal) Python API that I can use?

    Read the article

  • How Can I Point My Local Testing Server at My GitHub Repository?

    - by Goober
    Up until a few days ago, I had a particular setup that was as follows. Using SVN, all of the websites that I developed were committed to a source control drop box on a local testing server. Then using IIS, a new website was set up to point at the last revision of each particular website I developed and display it to the outside world using a specific URL. I have just moved over to using git and github, meaning all of my source controlled code is now no longer stored on a local testing server. As a result of this, I am not sure how I can go about doing a similar thing to what I did with the SVN setup, however I need to be able to essentially have that same setup again, just using Git. So basically, how can I go about getting my local testing server to point at the GitHub repository for that site? Help greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • What is the Optimal Server Configuration for Split-Path Testing?

    - by doug
    I am far from an expert on Apache or any server for that matter, so i apologize if this question is poorly worded, which it likely is. We have always relied on a vendor for split-path testing (aka "AB Testing"). If you're not familiar with that term, it's a form of marketing research in which you slightly modify one of your web pages (usually one nearest the point of conversion), say for instance, by changing the position of the "Buy Now" button or its color/contrast/texture, then serving one of those two pages to a given user based on random selection. By doing split-path testing ourselves, I suspect we can do it far more cheaply and increase cycle times as well. What is the optimal set-up for these tests? "Optimal" is based on the following criteria: how quickly/easily new tests can be set-up and put online; and minimal disruption to overall site performance

    Read the article

  • How should I design a correct OO design in case of a Business-logic wide operation

    - by Mithir
    EDIT: Maybe I should ask the question in a different way. in light of ammoQ's comment, I realize that I've done something like suggested which is kind of a fix and it is fine by me. But I still want to learn for the future, so that if I develop new code for operations similar to this, I can design it correctly from the start. So, if I got the following characteristics: The relevant input is composed from data which is connected to several different business objects All the input data is validated and cross-checked Attempts are made in order to insert the data to the DB All this is just a single operation from Business side prospective, meaning all of the cross checking and validations are just side effects. I can't think of any other way but some sort of Operator/Coordinator kind of Object which activates the entire procedure, but then I fall into a Functional-Decomposition kind of code. so is there a better way in doing this? Original Question In our system we have many complex operations which involve many validations and DB activities. One of the main Business functionality could have been designed better. In short, there were no separation of layers, and the code would only work from the scenario in which it was first designed at, and now there were more scenarios (like requests from an API or from other devices) So I had to redesign. I found myself moving all the DB code to objects which acts like Business to DB objects, and I've put all the business logic in an Operator kind of a class, which I've implemented like this: First, I created an object which will hold all the information needed for the operation let's call it InformationObject. Then I created an OperatorObject which will take the InformationObject as a parameter and act on it. The OperatorObject should activate different objects and validate or check for existence or any scenario in which the business logic is compromised and then make the operation according to the information on the InformationObject. So my question is - Is this kind of implementation correct? PS, this Operator only works on a single Business-wise Operation.

    Read the article

  • The art of Unit Testing with Examples in .NET

    - by outcoldman
    First time when I familiarized with unit testing was 5 or 6 years ago. It was start of my developing career. I remember that somebody told me about code coverage. At that time I didn’t write any Unit tests. Guy, who was my team lead, told me “Do you see operator if with three conditions? You should check all of these conditions”. So, after that I had written some code, I should go to interface and try to invoke all code which I wrote from user interface. Nice? At current time I know little more about tests and unit testing. I have not participated in projects, designed by Test Driven Development (TDD). Basics of my knowledge are a spying code of my colleagues, some articles and screencasts. I had decide that I should know much more, and became a real professional of unit testing, this is why I had start to read book The art of Unit Testing with Examples in .NET. More than, in my current job place looks like I’m just one who writing unit tests for my code. I should show good examples of my tests. ,a href="http://outcoldman.ru/en/blog/show/267"Read more...

    Read the article

  • looking for a short explanation of fuzzy logic

    - by user613326
    Well i got the idea that basics of fuzzy logic are not that hard to grasp. And i got the feeling that someone might explain it to me in like 30 minutes. Just like i understand neural networks and am able to re-create the famous Xor problem. And go just beyond it and create 3 layer networks of x nodes. I'd like to understand fuzzy till a similar usefully level, in c# language. However the problem is face, I'd like to get concept right however i see many websites who include lots of errors in their basic explaining. Like for example showing pictures and use different numbers as shown in pictures to calculate, as if lots of people just copied stuff without noticing what they write down. While others for me go to deep in their math notation) To me that's very annoying to learn from. For me there is no need to re-invent wheel; Aforge already got a fuzzy logic framework. So what i am looking for are some good examples, good examples like how the neural XOR problem is solved. Is there anyone such a instructional resource out there; do you know a web page, or YouTube where it is shortly explained, what would you recommend me ? Note this article comes close; but it just doesnt nail it for me. After that i downloaded a bunch of free PDF's but most are academic and hard to read for me (i'm not English and dont have a special math degree). (i've been looking around a lot for this, good starter material about it is hard to find).

    Read the article

  • Documenting mathematical logic in code

    - by Kiril Raychev
    Sometimes, although not often, I have to include math logic in my code. The concepts used are mostly very simple, but the resulting code is not - a lot of variables with unclear purpose, and some operations with not so obvious intent. I don't mean that the code is unreadable or unmaintainable, just that it's waaaay harder to understand than the actual math problem. I try to comment the parts which are hardest to understand, but there is the same problem as in just coding them - text does not have the expressive power of math. I am looking for a more efficient and easy to understand way of explaining the logic behind some of the complex code, preferably in the code itself. I have considered TeX - writing the documentation and generating it separately from the code. But then I'd have to learn TeX, and the documentation will not be in the code itself. Another thing I thought of is taking a picture of the mathematical notations, equations and diagrams written on paper/whiteboard, and including it in javadoc. Is there a simpler and clearer way? P.S. Giving descriptive names(timeOfFirstEvent instead of t1) to the variables actually makes the code more verbose and even harder too read.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41  | Next Page >