Search Results

Search found 4783 results on 192 pages for 'tests'.

Page 37/192 | < Previous Page | 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44  | Next Page >

  • What is the best way to test using grails using IDEA?

    - by egervari
    I am seriously having a very non-pleasant time testing using Grails. I will describe my experience, and I'd like to know if there's a better way. The first problem I have with testing is that Grails doesn't give immediate feedback to the developer when .save() fails inside of an integration test. So let's say you have a domain class with 12 fields, and 1 of them is violating a constraint and you don't know it when you create the instance... it just doesn't save. Naturally, the test code afterward is going to fail. This is most troublesome because the thingy under test is probably fine... and the real risk and pain is the setup code for the test itself. So, I've tried to develop the habit of using .save(failOnError: true) to avoid this problem, but that's not something that can be easily enforced by everyone working on the project... and it's kind of bloaty. It'd be nice to turn this on for code that is running as part of a unit test automatically. Integration Tests run slow. I cannot understand how 1 integration test that saves 1 object takes 15-20 seconds to run. With some careful test planning, I've been able to get 1000 tests talking to an actual database and doing dbunit dumps after every test to happen in about the same time! This is dumb. It is hard to run all the unit tests and not integration tests in IDEA. Integration tests are a massive pain. Idea actually shows a GREEN BAR when integration tests fail. The output given by grails indicates that something failed, but it doesn't say what it was. It says to look in the test reports... which forces the developer to launch up their file system to hunt the stupid html file down. What a pain. Then once you got the html file and click to the failing test, it'll tell you a line number. Since these reports are not in the IDE, you can't just click the stack trace to go to that line of code... you gotta go back and find it yourself. ARGGH!@!@! Maybe people put up with this, but I refuse. Testing should not be this painful. It should be fast and painless, or people won't do it. Please help. What is the solution? Rails instead of Grails? Something else entirely? I love the Grails framework, but they never demo their testing for a reason. They have a snazzy framework, but the testing is painful. After having used Scala for the last 1.5 months, and being totally spoiled by ScalaTest... I can't go back to this.

    Read the article

  • Unit testing authorization in a Pylons app fails; cookies aren't been correctly set or recorded

    - by Ian Stevens
    I'm having an issue running unit tests for authorization in a Pylons app. It appears as though certain cookies set in the test case may not be correctly written or parsed. Cookies work fine when hitting the app with a browser. Here is my test case inside a paste-generated TestController: def test_good_login(self): r = self.app.post('/dologin', params={'login': self.user['username'], 'password': self.password}) r = r.follow() # Should only be one redirect to root assert 'http://localhost/' == r.request.url assert 'Dashboard' in r This is supposed to test that a login of an existing account forwards the user to the dashboard page. Instead, what happens is that the user is redirected back to the login. The first POST works, sets the user in the session and returns cookies. Although those cookies are sent in the follow request, they don't seem to be correctly parsed. I start by setting a breakpoint at the beginning of the above method and see what the login response returns: > nosetests --pdb --pdb-failure -s foo.tests.functional.test_account:TestMainController.test_good_login Running setup_config() from foo.websetup > /Users/istevens/dev/foo/foo/tests/functional/test_account.py(33)test_good_login() -> r = self.app.post('/dologin', params={'login': self.user['username'], 'password': self.password}) (Pdb) n > /Users/istevens/dev/foo/foo/tests/functional/test_account.py(34)test_good_login() -> r = r.follow() # Should only be one redirect to root (Pdb) p r.cookies_set {'auth_tkt': '"4c898eb72f7ad38551eb11e1936303374bd871934bd871833d19ad8a79000000!"'} (Pdb) p r.request.environ['REMOTE_USER'] '4bd871833d19ad8a79000000' (Pdb) p r.headers['Location'] 'http://localhost/?__logins=0' A session appears to be created and a cookie sent back. The browser is redirected to the root, not the login, which also indicates a successful login. If I step past the follow(), I get: > /Users/istevens/dev/foo/foo/tests/functional/test_account.py(35)test_good_login() -> assert 'http://localhost/' == r.request.url (Pdb) p r.request.headers {'Host': 'localhost:80', 'Cookie': 'auth_tkt=""\\"4c898eb72f7ad38551eb11e1936303374bd871934bd871833d19ad8a79000000!\\"""; '} (Pdb) p r.request.environ['REMOTE_USER'] *** KeyError: KeyError('REMOTE_USER',) (Pdb) p r.request.environ['HTTP_COOKIE'] 'auth_tkt=""\\"4c898eb72f7ad38551eb11e1936303374bd871934bd871833d19ad8a79000000!\\"""; ' (Pdb) p r.request.cookies {'auth_tkt': ''} (Pdb) p r <302 Found text/html location: http://localhost/login?__logins=1&came_from=http%3A%2F%2Flocalhost%2F body='302 Found...y. '/149> This indicates to me that the cookie was passed in on the request, although with dubious escaping. The environ appears to be without the session created on the prior request. The cookie has been copied to the environ from the headers, but the cookies in the request seems incorrectly set. Lastly, the user is redirected to the login page, indicating that the user isn't logged in. Authorization in the app is done via repoze.who and repoze.who.plugins.ldap with repoze.who_friendlyform performing the challenge. I'm using the stock tests.TestController created by paste: class TestController(TestCase): def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs): if pylons.test.pylonsapp: wsgiapp = pylons.test.pylonsapp else: wsgiapp = loadapp('config:%s' % config['__file__']) self.app = TestApp(wsgiapp) url._push_object(URLGenerator(config['routes.map'], environ)) TestCase.__init__(self, *args, **kwargs) That's a webtest.TestApp, by the way. The encoding of the cookie is done in webtest.TestApp using Cookie: >>> from Cookie import _quote >>> _quote('"84533cf9f661f97239208fb844a09a6d4bd8552d4bd8550c3d19ad8339000000!"') '"\\"84533cf9f661f97239208fb844a09a6d4bd8552d4bd8550c3d19ad8339000000!\\""' I trust that that's correct. My guess is that something on the response side is incorrectly parsing the cookie data into cookies in the server-side request. But what? Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Visual Studio 2010 Productivity Tips and Tricks-Part 2: Key Shortcuts

    - by ToStringTheory
    Ask anyone that knows me, and they will confirm that I hate the mouse.  This isn’t because I deny affection to objects that don’t look like their mammalian-named self, but rather for a much more simple and not-insane reason: I have terrible eyesight.  Introduction Thanks to a degenerative eye disease known as Choroideremia, I have learned to rely more on the keyboard which I can feel digital/static positions of keys relative to my fingers, than the much more analog/random position of the mouse.  Now, I would like to share some of the keyboard shortcuts with you now, as I believe that they not only increase my productivity, but yours as well once you know them (if you don’t already of course)...  I share one of my biggest tips for productivity in the conclusion at the end. Visual Studio Key Shortcuts Global Editor Shortcuts These are shortcuts that are available from almost any application running in Windows, however are many times forgotten. Shortcut Action Visual Studio 2010 Functionality Ctrl + X Cut This shortcut works without a selection. If nothing is selected, the entire line that the caret is on is cut from the editor. Ctrl + C Copy This shortcut works without a selection. If nothing is selected, the entire line that the caret is on is copied from the editor. Ctrl + V Paste If you copied an entire line by the method above, the data is pasted in the line above the current caret line. Ctrl + Shift + V Next Clipboard Element Cut/Copy multiple things, and then hit this combo repeatedly to switch to the next clipboard item when pasting. Ctrl + Backspace Delete Previous Will delete the previous word from the editor directly before the caret. If anything is selected, will just delete that. Ctrl + Del Delete Next Word Will delete the next word/space from the editor directly after the caret. If anything is selected, will just delete that. Shift + Del Delete Focused Line Will delete the line from the editor that the caret is on. If something is selected, will just delete that. Ctrl + ? or Ctrl + ? Left/Right by Word This will move the caret left or right by word or special character boundary. Holding Shift will also select the word. Ctrl + F Quick Find Either the Quick Find panel, or the search bar if you have the Productivity Power Tools installed. Ctrl + Shift + F Find in Solution Opens up the 'Find in Files' window, allowing you to search your solution, as well as using regex for pattern matching. F2 Rename File... While not debugging, selecting a file in the solution explorer\navigator and pressing F2 allows you to rename the selected file. Global Application Shortcuts These are shortcuts that are available from almost any application running in Windows, however are many times forgotten... Again... Shortcut Action Visual Studio 2010 Functionality Ctrl + N New File dialog Opens up the 'New File' dialog to add a new file to the current directory in the Solution\Project. Ctrl + O Open File dialog Opens up the 'Open File' dialog to open a file in the editor, not necessarily in the solution. Ctrl + S Save File dialog Saves the currently focused editor tab back to your HDD/SSD. Ctrl + Shift + S Save All... Quickly save all open/edited documents back to your disk. Ctrl + Tab Switch Panel\Tab Tapping this combo switches between tabs quickly. Holding down Ctrl when hitting tab will bring up a chooser window. Building Shortcuts These are shortcuts that are focused on building and running a solution. These are not usable when the IDE is in Debug mode, as the shortcut changes by context. Shortcut Action Visual Studio 2010 Functionality Ctrl + Shift + B Build Solution Starts a build process on the solution according to the current build configuration manager settings. Ctrl + Break Cancel a Building Solution Will cancel a build operation currently in progress. Good for long running builds when you think of one last change. F5 Start Debugging Will build the solution if needed and launch debugging according to the current configuration manager settings. Ctrl + F5 Start Without Debugger Will build the solution if needed and launch the startup project without attaching a debugger. Debugging Shortcuts These are shortcuts that are used when debugging a solution. Shortcut Action Visual Studio 2010 Functionality F5 Continue Execution Continues execution of code until the next breakpoint. Ctrl + Alt + Break Pause Execution Pauses the program execution. Shift + F5 Stop Debugging Stops the current debugging session. NOTE: Web apps will still continue processing after stopping the debugger. Keep this in mind if working on code such as credit card processing. Ctrl + Shift + F5 Restart Debugging Stops the current debugging session and restarts the debugging session from the beginning. F9 Place Breakpoint Toggles/Places a breakpoint in the editor on the current line. Set a breakpoint in condensed code by highlighting the statement first. F10 Step Over Statement When debugging, executes all code in methods/properties on the current line until the next line. F11 Step Into Statement When debugging, steps into a method call so you can walk through the code executed there (if available). Ctrl + Alt + I Immediate Window Open the Immediate Window to execute commands when execution is paused. Navigation Shortcuts These are shortcuts that are used for navigating in the IDE or editor panel. Shortcut Action Visual Studio 2010 Functionality F4 Properties Panel Opens the properties panel for the selected item in the editor/designer/solution navigator (context driven). F12 Go to Definition Press F12 with the caret on a member to navigate to its declaration. With the Productivity tools, Ctrl + Click works too. Ctrl + K Ctrl + T View Call Hierarchy View the call hierarchy of the member the caret is on. Great for going through n-tier solutions and interface implementations! Ctrl + Alt + B Breakpoint Window View the breakpoint window to manage breakpoints and their advanced options. Allows easy toggling of breakpoints. Ctrl + Alt + L Solution Navigator Open the solution explorer panel. Ctrl + Alt + O Output Window View the output window to see build\general output from Visual Studio. Ctrl + Alt + Enter Live Web Preview Only available with the Web Essential plugin. Launches the auto-updating Preview panel. Testing Shortcuts These are shortcuts that are used for running tests in the IDE. Please note, Visual Studio 2010 is all about context. If your caret is within a test method when you use one of these combinations, the combination will apply to that test. If your caret is within a test class, it will apply to that class. If the caret is outside of a test class, it will apply to all tests. Shortcut Action Visual Studio 2010 Functionality Ctrl + R T Run Test(s) Run all tests in the current context without a debugger attached. Breakpoints will not be stopped on. Ctrl + R Ctrl + T Run Test(s) (Debug) Run all tests in the current context with a debugger attached. This allows you to use breakpoints. Substitute A for T from the preceding combos to run/debug ALL tests in the current context. Substitute Y for T from the preceding combos to run/debug ALL impacted/covering tests for a method in the current context. Advanced Editor Shortcuts These are shortcuts that are used for more advanced editing in the editor window. Shortcut Action Visual Studio 2010 Functionality Shift + Alt + ? Shift + Alt + ? Multiline caret up/down Use this combo to edit multiple lines at once. Not too many uses for it, but once in a blue moon one comes along. Ctrl + Alt + Enter Insert Line Above Inserts a blank line above the line the caret is currently on. No need to be at end or start of line, so no cutting off words/code. Ctrl + K Ctrl + C Comment Selection Comments the current selection out of compilation. Ctrl + K Ctrl + U Uncomment Selection Uncomments the current selection into compilation. Ctrl + K Ctrl + D Format Document Automatically formats the document into a structured layout. Lines up nodes or code into columns intelligently. Alt + ? Alt + ? Code line up/down *Use this combo to move a line of code up or down quickly. Great for small rearrangements of code. *Requires the Productivity Power pack from Microsoft. Conclusion This list is by no means meant to be exhaustive, but these are the shortcuts I use regularly every hour/minute of the day. There are still 100s more in Visual Studio that you can discover through the configuration window, or by tooltips. Something that I started doing months ago seems to have interest in my office.. In my last post, I talked about how I hated a cluttered UI. One of the ways that I aimed to resolve that was by systematically cleaning up the toolbars week by week. First day, I removed ALL icons that I already knew shortcuts to, or would never use them (Undo in a toolbar?!). Then, every week from that point on, I make it a point to remove an icon/two from the toolbar and make an effort to remember its key combination. I gain extra space in the toolbar area, AND become more productive at the same time! I hope that you found this article interesting or at least somewhat informative.. Maybe a shortcut or two you didn't know. I know some of them seem trivial, but I often see people going to the edit menu for Copy/Paste... Thought a refresher might be helpful!

    Read the article

  • PHP remote development workflow: git, symfony and hudson

    - by user2022
    I'm looking to develop a website and all the work will be done remotely (no local dev server). The reason for this is that my shared hosting company a2hosting has a specific configuration (symfony,mysql,git) that I don't want to spend time duplicating when I can just ssh and develop remotely or through netbeans remote editing features. My question is how can I use git to separate my site into three areas: live, staging and dev. Here's my initial thought: public_html (live site and git repo) testing: a mirror of the site used for visual tests (full git repo) dev/ticket# : git branches of public_html used for features and bug fixes (full git repo) Version Control with git: Initial setup: cd public_html git init git add * git commit -m ‘initial commit of the site’ cd .. git clone public_html testing mkdir dev Development: cd /dev git clone ../testing ticket# all work is done in ./dev/ticket#, then visit www.domain.com/dev/ticket# to visually test make granular commits as necessary until dev is done git push origin master:ticket# if the above fails: merge latest testing state into current dev work: git merge origin/master then try the push again mark ticket# as ready for integration integration and deployment process: cd ../../testing git merge ticket# -m "integration test for ticket# --no-ff (check for conflicts ) run hudson tests visit www.domain.com/testing for visual test if all tests pass: if this ticket marks the end of a big dev sprint: make a snapshot with git tag git push --tags origin else git push origin cd ../public_html git checkout -f (live site should have the latest dev from ticket#) else: revert the merge: git checkout master~1; git commit -m "reverting ticket#" update ticket# that testing failed with the failure details Snapshots: Each major deployment sprint should have a standard name and should be tracked. Method: git tag Naming convention: TBD Reverting site to previous state If something goes wrong, then revert to previous snapshot and debug the issue in dev with a new ticket#. Once the bug is fixed, follow the deployment process again. My questions: Does this workflow make sense, if not, any recommendations Is my approach for reverting correct or is there a better way to say 'revert to before x commit'

    Read the article

  • Does TDD really work for complex projects?

    - by Amir Rezaei
    I’m asking this question regarding problems I have experienced during TDD projects. I have noticed the following challenges when creating unit tests. Generating and maintaining mock data It’s hard and unrealistic to maintain large mock data. It’s is even harder when database structure undergoes changes. Testing GUI Even with MVVM and ability to test GUI, it takes a lot of code to reproduce the GUI scenario. Testing the business I have experience that TDD works well if you limit it to simple business logic. However complex business logic is hard to test since the number of combinations of tests (test space) is very large. Contradiction in requirements In reality it’s hard to capture all requirements under analysis and design. Many times one note requirements lead to contradiction because the project is complex. The contradiction is found late under implementation phase. TDD requires that requirements are 100% correct. In such cases one could expect that conflicting requirements would be captured during creating of tests. But the problem is that this isn’t the case in complex scenarios. I have read this question: Why does TDD work? Does TDD really work for complex enterprise projects, or is it practically limit to project type?

    Read the article

  • Bridging the gap between developers and testers with VS 2010

    - by Etienne Tremblay
    Hey everyone, I know it’s been an eternity since I blogged but I have so much to do that I unfortunately need to prioritize.  Vincent Grondin and I did a 7h presentation on the new developer and tester tools available in the VS 2010 suite.  It was a blast.  We did it in front of an audience (around 120) and it was taped.  We did it as a play and really didn’t look at the crowd at all we were training each other on the technology. It is now available for anyone that would like to watch it at this location: http://www.devteach.com/ALM-TFS2010-Bridgingthegap.aspx What we covered in the full day event was Migration to TFS 2010 (10h00) 1-Migration of VSS to TFS (20 min.) 2-Automating the Build (Something you can't do with VSS) ( 20 Min.) 3-User story (Real application context for this presentation) (20 min.) 10h00 Pause Manuel Tests by Dev ( 11h30) 4-Adding a tester to the team (Into to MTM) (20 min.) 5-Define tests (what is a white bug) (20 min.) 6-Fix the bug and show Intellitrace and Play back the test (20 min.) 12h15 Lunch Manuel testing for maintenance (13h30) 7- Implement new Feature (web service) and Identify bug with MTM and branch for a production fix and also add a new Build script (20 min.) 8- Fix bug in production branch, Playback tests, merge the change in main branch (20 min.) Manuel testing with the lab manager (14h30) 9- Intro to Lab manager and environment (20 min.) 10- Change build script to deploy to lab and test with web service in lab environment. (20 min.) 15h15 Pause Automate UI test with CodeUI (15h30) 11- Reducing the effort of testing the UI (20 min.) 12- Repeating testing to make sure the application is working properly (20 min.) 13- Automate Coded UI with the Lab environment (20 min.) 16h30 Conclusions As you can see lots of stuff!! Enjoy the show and let us know how you like it Cheers, ET Technorati Tags: VS 2010,Testing Tools,ALM,Training

    Read the article

  • Why does TDD work?

    - by CesarGon
    Test-driven development (TDD) is big these days. I often see it recommended as a solution for a wide range of problems here in Programmers SE and other venues. I wonder why it works. From an engineering point of view, it puzzles me for two reasons: The "write test + refactor till pass" approach looks incredibly anti-engineering. If civil engineers used that approach for bridge construction, or car designers for their cars, for example, they would be reshaping their bridges or cars at very high cost, and the result would be a patched-up mess with no well thought-out architecture. The "refactor till pass" guideline is often taken as a mandate to forget architectural design and do whatever is necessary to comply with the test; in other words, the test, rather than the user, sets the requirement. In this situation, how can we guarantee good "ilities" in the outcomes, i.e. a final result that is not only correct but also extensible, robust, easy to use, reliable, safe, secure, etc.? This is what architecture usually does. Testing cannot guarantee that a system works; it can only show that it doesn't. In other words, testing may show you that a system contains defects if it fails a test, but a system that passes all tests is not safer than a system that fails them. Test coverage, test quality and other factors are crucial here. The false safe feelings that an "all green" outcomes produces to many people has been reported in civil and aerospace industries as extremely dangerous, because it may be interepreted as "the system is fine", when it really means "the system is as good as our testing strategy". Often, the testing strategy is not checked. Or, who tests the tests? I would like to see answers containing reasons why TDD in software engineering is a good practice, and why the issues that I have explained above are not relevant (or not relevant enough) in the case of software. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • How to refactor while keeping accuracy and redundancy?

    - by jluzwick
    Before I ask this question I will preface it with our environment. My team consists of 3 programmers working on multiple different projects. Due to this, our use of testing is mostly limited to very general black box testing. Take the following assumptions also: Unit Tests will eventually be written but I'm under strict orders to refactor first Ignore common Test-Driven Development techniques when given this environment, my time is limited. I understand that if this were done correctly, our team would actually save money in the long-term by building Unit-Tests before hand. I'm about to refactor a fairly large portion of the code that is critical. While I believe my code will accurately work when done and after our black box testing, I realize that there will be new data that the new code might not be able to handle. What I wanted to know is how to keep old code that functions 98% of the time so that we can call those subroutines in case the new code doesn't work properly. Right now I'm thinking of separating the old code in a separate class file and adding a variable to our config that will tell the program which code to use. Is there a better way to handle this? NOTE: We do use revision control and we have archived builds so the client could always revert to a previous build, but I would like to see if there is a decent way of doing this besides reverting. I want this so they can use the other new functionality delivered in the new build. Edit: While I agree I will need to write Unit Tests for this, I don't believe I will capture everything with them. I'm looking for ways to easily be able to revert to the old, functional code should anything happen. While I know this is a poor practice, I'm planning on removing this code after our team can guarantee that the new code works to the same standards as the old.

    Read the article

  • Code Measuring and Metrics Tools?

    - by David
    I'm in the process of setting up a build server for personal projects. This server will handle all the normal CI stuff, including running large suites of tests (unit, integration, automated UI). While I'm working out the kinks for including code coverage output with MSTest, it occurs to me that there may be lots of tools out there which give me additional metrics other than just code coverage. FxCop comes to mind as an example. Though I'm sure there are others. Anything that can generate useful reportable data and metrics would be good. Whether it's class dependency charts (looking for Law of Demeter violations, for example), analyses of the uses of classes/functions (looking for a function that isn't used in the system other than just the tests, for example), and so on. I'm not sure the right way to formulate the question, since polling questions or "What's your favorite code analysis tool" aren't very good. But I'm essentially just looking for recommendations on what metrics to gather and the tools that can gather them. The eventual vision for something like this is to have the CI server run a bunch of automated tests and analysis tools and track performance metrics over time. Imagine a dashboard full of graphs plotting these metrics over time. The lines should all relatively be at an equilibrium, and if one starts to stray toward the negative then it's an early indication of problems with the code. In the age old struggle to quantify code quality with management, this sounds like a potentially helpful means of doing just that.

    Read the article

  • Disk failure is imminent Laptop Hard drive ~5 months old

    - by Drew
    There's another post about this, but I don't have enough 'points' to say anything on that thread. So I'll start my own ... with more details! My computer still boots, but gnome domain reports problems with HDD smart. This has been confirmed in the bios as it makes me press f1 to boot up now. I tried running HDD disk check in the bios, but it fails running the tests. As in, running the tests failed not that the tests themselves indicated a failed drive. Here is what disk utility is reporting as failing: Reallocated Sector Count FAILING Normalized: 132 Worst: 132 Threshold: 140 Value: 544 Current Pending Sector Count WARNING Normalized: 200 Worst: 1 Threshold: 0 Value: 2 Is this related to the insane number of DRDY errors on the drive? kernel: [51345.233069] ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x0 kernel: [51345.233076] ata1.00: BMDMA stat 0x4 kernel: [51345.233081] ata1.00: failed command: READ DMA kernel: [51345.233090] ata1.00: cmd c8/00:00:00:8b:4a/00:00:00:00:00/e0 tag 0 dma 131072 in kernel: [51345.233092] res 51/40:00:a8:8b:4a/10:04:00:00:00/e0 Emask 0x9 (media error) kernel: [51345.233097] ata1.00: status: { DRDY ERR } kernel: [51345.233103] ata1.00: error: { UNC } kernel: [51345.291929] ata1.00: configured for UDMA/100 kernel: [51345.291944] ata1: EH complete kernel: [51347.682748] ata1.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x0 kernel: [51347.682754] ata1.00: BMDMA stat 0x4 kernel: [51347.682759] ata1.00: failed command: READ DMA kernel: [51347.682768] ata1.00: cmd c8/00:00:00:8b:4a/00:00:00:00:00/e0 tag 0 dma 131072 in kernel: [51347.682770] res 51/40:00:a8:8b:4a/10:04:00:00:00/e0 Emask 0x9 (media error) kernel: [51347.682774] ata1.00: status: { DRDY ERR } kernel: [51347.682777] ata1.00: error: { UNC } Did Ubuntu 10.10 and/or EXT4 eat my work laptop? What steps can I take to backup my important information, which is probably the home folder. Please include steps to recover my data on the new hard drive as well. It does me little good to have backups I can't use.

    Read the article

  • Have unit test generators helped you when working with legacy code?

    - by Duncan Bayne
    I am looking at a small (~70kLOC including generated) C# (.NET 4.0, some Silverlight) code-base that has very low test coverage. The code itself works in that it has passed user acceptance testing, but it is brittle and in some areas not very well factored. I would like to add solid unit test coverage around the legacy code using the usual suspects (NMock, NUnit, StatLight for the Silverlight bits). My normal approach is to start working through the project, unit testing & refactoring, until I am satisfied with the state of the code. I've done this many times in the past, and it's worked well. However, this time I'm thinking of using a test generator (in particular Pex) to create the test framework, then manually fleshing it out. My question is: have you used unit test generators in the past when commencing work on a legacy codebase, and if so, would you recommend them? My fear is that the generated tests will miss the semantic nuances of the code-base, leading to the dreaded situation of having tests for the sake of the coverage metric, rather than tests which clearly express the intended behaviour in code.

    Read the article

  • At which point is a continuous integration server interesting?

    - by Cedric Martin
    I've been reading a bit about CI servers like Jenkins and I'm wondering: at which point is it useful? Because surely for a tiny project where you'd have only 5 classes and 10 unit tests, there's no real need. Here we've got about 1500 unit tests and they pass (on old Core 2 Duo workstations) in about 90 seconds (because they're really testing "units" and hence are very fast). The rule we have is that we cannot commit code when a test fail. So each developers launches all his tests to prevent regression. Obviously, because all the developers always launch all the test we catch errors due to conflicting changes as soon as one developer pulls the change of another (when any). It's still not very clear to me: should I set up a CI server like Jenkins? What would it bring? Is it just useful for the speed gain? (not an issue in our case) Is it useful because old builds can be recreated? (but we can do this to with Mercurial, by checking out old revs) Basically I understand it can be useful but I fail to see exactly why. Any explanation taking into account the points I raised above would be most welcome.

    Read the article

  • How to drastically improve code coverage?

    - by Peter Kofler
    I'm tasked with getting a legacy application under unit test. First some background about the application: It's a 600k LOC Java RCP code base with these major problems massive code duplication no encapsulation, most private data is accessible from outside, some of the business data also made singletons so it's not just changeable from outside but also from everywhere. no business model, business data is stored in Object[] and double[][], so no OO. There is a good regression test suite and an efficient QA team is testing and finding bugs. I know the techniques how to get it under test from classic books, e.g. Michael Feathers, but that's too slow. As there is a working regression test system I'm not afraid to aggressively refactor the system to allow unit tests to be written. How should I start to attack the problem to get some coverage quickly, so I'm able to show progress to management (and in fact to start earning from safety net of JUnit tests)? I do not want to employ tools to generate regression test suites, e.g. AgitarOne, because these tests do not test if something is correct.

    Read the article

  • Should I start MCPD training now or wait for new exams?

    - by lunchmeat317
    i apologize if this question has been asked before, or if this is the wrong place to put it. I'm beginning my study track for the MCPD certification in Web Development. However, Microsoft plans to retire this certification on July 31st of 2013, along with two of the necessary tests to receive the certification. On MS's site, I can't find a newer certification path to take - I imagine that Microsoft will release new certification paths and new tests for their new software, but I don't know when that will happen. I don't really know anything about Microsoft's process, as this is the first Microsoft certification I'll be studying for. The bottom line is this - I don't want to lose six months waiting for a new test to appear that won't expire, but I don't want to rush to get a certification that will be invalid in six months (or have to reset any progress due to new study material). To those with experience in affairs like this - what is the best course to take, and can I maximize the time I have now (not wait for new testing material)? Is there any way to find material for the new tests that Microsoft will be rolling out? Thank you for your patience. If this is the wrong place to put this question, I would like to request that it be moved to the correct StackExchange site instead of being closed. Thanks for your help!

    Read the article

  • How would you TDD the functionality of getting the corresponding process of a running windows service?

    - by Matt Spinelli
    Purpose Over the last year or more I've been learning unit testing via books I've read recently like The Art of Unit Testing, Working Effectively with Legacy Code, and others. I've also been using unit tests, mocking frameworks, and the like, periodically at work and definitely see the value. However, I'm still having a hard time wrapping my mind around TDD (as opposed to TAD) when the situation calls for code that is gong to mostly use external API calls. Problem to solve Get the process associated with a windows service using the service name. example: Function GetProcess(ByVal serviceName As String) As Process Rules Show each major iteration in production & test code using TDD No need to see any other code or configuration that is required to get things to run. Just curious about the interfaces, concrete classes, and test methods. C# or VB.NET Must use the .Net framework regarding services/processes (i.e. System.Diagnostics.Process) Test Frameworks: Nunit or MSTest Isolation Frameworks: Moq, Rhino Mock, or Microsoft Moles Must write true unit tests (no integration tests) Additional notes As far as I can tell there are two approaches design wise. Use an Inversion of Control approach along with using the Adapter and/or Facade patterns to wrap the underlying .net framework objects dealing with processes and services. Keep the .net framework code in the class containing the Get Process method and use code detouring (interception) via Microsoft Moles to isolate the hard dependencies from the method under test.

    Read the article

  • Writing Acceptance test cases

    - by HH_
    We are integrating a testing process in our SCRUM process. My new role is to write acceptance tests of our web applications in order to automate them later. I have read a lot about how tests cases should be written, but none gave me practical advices to write test cases for complex web applications, and instead they threw conflicting principles that I found hard to apply: Test cases should be short: Take the example of a CMS. Short test cases are easy to maintain and to identify the inputs and outputs. But what if I want to test a long series of operations (eg. adding a document, sending a notification to another user, the other user replies, the document changes state, the user gets a notice). It rather seems to me that test cases should represent complete scenarios. But I can see how this will produce overtly complex test documents. Tests should identify inputs and outputs:: What if I have a long form with many interacting fields, with different behaviors. Do I write one test for everything, or one for each? Test cases should be independent: But how can I apply that if testing the upload operation requires that the connect operation is successful? And how does it apply to writing test cases? Should I write a test for each operation, but each test declares its dependencies, or should I rewrite the whole scenario for each test? Test cases should be lightly-documented: This principles is specific to Agile projects. So do you have any advice on how to implement this principle? Although I thought that writing acceptance test cases was going to be simple, I found myself overwhelmed by every decision I had to make (FYI: I am a developer and not a professional tester). So my main question is: What steps or advices do you have in order to write maintainable acceptance test cases for complex applications. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Groovy JUnit test support

    - by Martin Janicek
    Good news everyone! I've implemented support for the Groovy JUnit tests which basically means you can finally use Groovy in the area where is so highly productive! You can create a new Groovy JUnit test in the New File/Groovy/Groovy JUnit test and it should behave in the same way as for Java tests. Which means if there is no JUnit setup in your project yet, you can choose between JUnit 3 and JUnit 4 template and with respect to your choice the project settings will be changed (in case of the Maven based projects the correct dependencies and plugins are added to the pom.xml and in case of the Ant based project the JUnit dependency is configured). Or if the project is already configured, the correct template will be used. After that the test skeleton is created and you can write your own code and of course run the tests together with the java ones. Some of you were asking for this feature and of course I don't expect it will be perfect from the beginning so I would be really glad to see some constructive feedback about what could be improved and/or redesigned ;] ..at the end I have to say that the feature is not active for the Ant based Java EE projects yet (I'm aware of it and it will be fixed to the NetBeans 7.3 final - actually it will be done in a few days/weeks, just want you to know). But it's already complete in all types of the Maven based projects and also for the Ant based J2SE projects. And as always, the daily build where you can try the feature can be downloaded right here, so don't hesitate to try it!

    Read the article

  • Tomcat + Spring + CI workflow

    - by ex3v
    We're starting our very first project with Spring and java web stack. This project will be mainly about rewriting quite large ERP/CRM from Zend Framework to Java. Important factor in my question is that I come from php territory, where things (in terms of quality) tend to look different than in java world. Fatcs: there will be 2-3 developers, at least one of developers uses Windows, rest uses Linux, there is one remote linux-based machine, which should handle test and production instances, after struggling with buggy legacy code, we want to introduce good programming and development practices (CI, tests, clean code and so on) client: internal, frequent business logic changes, scrum, daily deployments What I want to achieve is good workflow on as many development stages as possible (coding - commiting - testing - deploying). The problem is that I've never done this before, so I don't know what are best practices to do this. What I have so far is: developers code locally, there is vagrant instance on every development machine, managed by puppet. It contains the same linux, jenkins and tomcat versions as production machine, while coding, developer deploys to vagrant machine, after local merge to test branch, jenkins on vagrant handles tests, when everything is fine, developer pushes commits and merges jenkins on remote machine pulls commit from test branch, runs tests and so on, if everything looks green, jenkins deploys to test tomcat instance Deployment to production is manual (altough it can be done using helping scripts) when business logic is tested by other divisions and everything looks fine to client. Now, the real question: does above make any sense? Things that I'm not sure about: Remote machine: won't there be any problems with two (or even three, as jenkins might need one) instances of same app on tomcat? Using vagrant to develop on php environment is just vise. Isn't this overkill while using Tomcat? I mean, is there higher probability that tomcat will act the same on every machine? Is there sense of having local jenkins on vagrant?

    Read the article

  • Copy-and-Pasted Test Code: How Bad is This?

    - by joshin4colours
    My current job is mostly writing GUI test code for various applications that we work on. However, I find that I tend to copy and paste a lot of code within tests. The reason for this is that the areas I'm testing tend to be similar enough to need repetition but not quite similar enough to encapsulate code into methods or objects. I find that when I try to use classes or methods more extensively, tests become more cumbersome to maintain and sometimes outright difficult to write in the first place. Instead, I usually copy a big chunk of test code from one section and paste it to another, and make any minor changes I need. I don't use more structured ways of coding, such as using more OO-principles or functions. Do other coders feel this way when writing test code? Obviously I want to follow DRY and YAGNI principles, but I find that test code (automated test code for GUI testing anyway) can make these principles tough to follow. Or do I just need more coding practice and a better overall system of doing things? EDIT: The tool I'm using is SilkTest, which is in a proprietary language called 4Test. As well, these tests are mostly for Windows desktop applications, but I also have tested web apps using this setup as well.

    Read the article

  • Why is code quality not popular?

    - by Peter Kofler
    I like my code being in order, i.e. properly formatted, readable, designed, tested, checked for bugs, etc. In fact I am fanatic about it. (Maybe even more than fanatic...) But in my experience actions helping code quality are hardly implemented. (By code quality I mean the quality of the code you produce day to day. The whole topic of software quality with development processes and such is much broader and not the scope of this question.) Code quality does not seem popular. Some examples from my experience include Probably every Java developer knows JUnit, almost all languages implement xUnit frameworks, but in all companies I know, only very few proper unit tests existed (if at all). I know that it's not always possible to write unit tests due to technical limitations or pressing deadlines, but in the cases I saw, unit testing would have been an option. If a developer wanted to write some tests for his/her new code, he/she could do so. My conclusion is that developers do not want to write tests. Static code analysis is often played around in small projects, but not really used to enforce coding conventions or find possible errors in enterprise projects. Usually even compiler warnings like potential null pointer access are ignored. Conference speakers and magazines would talk a lot about EJB3.1, OSGI, Cloud and other new technologies, but hardly about new testing technologies or tools, new static code analysis approaches (e.g. SAT solving), development processes helping to maintain higher quality, how some nasty beast of legacy code was brought under test, ... (I did not attend many conferences and it propably looks different for conferences on agile topics, as unit testing and CI and such has a higer value there.) So why is code quality so unpopular/considered boring? EDIT: Thank your for your answers. Most of them concern unit testing (and has been discussed in a related question). But there are lots of other things that can be used to keep code quality high (see related question). Even if you are not able to use unit tests, you could use a daily build, add some static code analysis to your IDE or development process, try pair programming or enforce reviews of critical code.

    Read the article

  • How to get NHProf reports in TeamCity running MSBUILD

    - by Jon Erickson
    I'm trying to get NHProf reports on my integration tests as a report in TeamCity I'm not sure how to get this set up correctly and my first attempts are unsuccessful. Let me know if there is any more information that would be helpful... I'm getting the following error, when trying to generate html reports with MSBUILD (which is being run by TeamCity) error MSB3073: The command "C:\CI\Tools\NHProf\NHProf.exe /CmdLineMode /File:"E:\CI\BuildServer\RMS-Winform\Group\dev\NHProfOutput.html" /ReportFormat:Html" exited with code -532459699 I tell TeamCity to run MSBUILD w/ CIBuildWithNHProf target The command line parameters that I pass from TeamCity are... /property:NHProfExecutable=%system.NHProfExecutable%;NHProfFile=%system.teamcity.build.checkoutDir%\NHProfOutput.html;NHProfReportFormat=Html The portion of my MSBUILD script that runs my tests is as follows... <UsingTask TaskName="NUnitTeamCity" AssemblyFile="$(teamcity_dotnet_nunitlauncher_msbuild_task)"/> <!-- Set Properties --> <PropertyGroup> <Configuration Condition=" '$(Configuration)' == '' ">Debug</Configuration> <Platform Condition=" '$(Platform)' == '' ">x86</Platform> <NHProfExecutable></NHProfExecutable> <NHProfFile></NHProfFile> <NHProfReportFormat></NHProfReportFormat> </PropertyGroup> <!-- Test Database --> <Target Name="DeployDatabase"> <!-- ... --> </Target> <!-- Database Used For Integration Tests --> <Target Name="DeployTestDatabase"> <!-- ... --> </Target> <!-- Build All Projects --> <Target Name="BuildProjects"> <MSBuild Projects="..\MySolutionFile.sln" Targets="Build"/> </Target> <!-- Stop NHProf --> <Target Name="NHProfStop"> <Exec Command="$(NHProfExecutable) /Shutdown" /> </Target> <!-- Run Unit/Integration Tests --> <Target Name="RunTests"> <CreateItem Include="..\**\bin\debug\*Tests.dll"> <Output TaskParameter="Include" ItemName="TestAssemblies" /> </CreateItem> <NUnitTeamCity Assemblies="@(TestAssemblies)" NUnitVersion="NUnit-2.5.3"/> </Target> <!-- Start NHProf --> <Target Name="NHProfStart"> <Exec Command="$(NHProfExecutable) /CmdLineMode /File:&quot;$(NHProfFile)&quot; /ReportFormat:$(NHProfReportFormat)" /> </Target> <Target Name="CIBuildWithNHProf" DependsOnTargets="BuildProjects;DeployTestDatabase;NHProfStart;RunTests;NHProfStop;DeployDatabase"> </Target>

    Read the article

  • Occasional Date or timezone discrepancy in hudson or maven with jodatime

    - by TheStijn
    hi, I hope following explanation will make sense because it's a weird problem we're facing and hard to describe. We have a maven project which gets build in hudson and that contains some unit tests where dates are used and asserted. The hudson server runs on solaris. Now, occasionally (like 30% of the times) the unit tests using dates fail because 3,5 hours are deducted from the specified time in the unit test and hence asserts start failing. The other 70% everything works fine although nothing at all changed in the code and we run the hudson job several times an hour. I add following code to a unittest to check the time: @Test public void testDate() { System.out.println("new DateMidnight(2011, 1, 5).toDate();"); System.out.println(new DateMidnight(2011, 1, 5).toDate()); System.out.println(new DateMidnight(2011, 1, 5).toDate().getTime()); Calendar cal = Calendar.getInstance(); cal.set(Calendar.YEAR, 2011); cal.set(Calendar.MONTH, 0); cal.set(Calendar.DAY_OF_MONTH, 5); cal.set(Calendar.HOUR, 0); cal.set(Calendar.MINUTE, 0); cal.set(Calendar.SECOND, 0); cal.set(Calendar.MILLISECOND, 0); System.out.println("cal.getTime();"); System.out.println(cal.getTime()); System.out.println(cal.getTime().getTime()); } So basically it should print the same thing when using jodatime or plain old Calendar. This is the case in 70% of the runs; for the other 30% I get following printouts: Running TestSuite new DateMidnight(2011, 1, 5).toDate(); Tue Jan 04 21:30:00 MET 2011 1294173000000 cal.getTime(); Wed Jan 05 12:00:00 MET 2011 1294225200000 Local maven tests never appear the pose this problem and we can't figure out what could be the cause of it. Especially, we can't think of a single reason why the tests sometimes pass and sometimes fail without changing any code nor hudson or server setting. Also, we run the maven install with cobertura which means that the unit tests are run twice. It happens also that they pass the first time and fail the second time or the other way around or that they fail both times. Thanks for any help, Stijn

    Read the article

  • VS2008: File creation fails randomly in unit testing?

    - by Tim
    I'm working on implementing a reasonably simple XML serializer/deserializer (log file parser) application in C# .NET with VS 2008. I have about 50 unit tests right now for various parts of the code (mostly for the various serialization operations), and some of them seem to be failing mostly at random when they deal with file I/O. The way the tests are structured is that in the test setup method, I create a new empty file at a certain predetermined location, and close the stream I get back. Then I run some basic tests on the file (varying by what exactly is under test). In the cleanup method, I delete the file again. A large portion (usually 30 or more, though the number varies run to run) of my unit tests will fail at the initialize method, claiming they can't access the file I'm trying to create. I can't pin down the exact reason, since a test that will work one run fails the next; they all succeed when run individually. What's the problem here? Why can't I access this file across multiple unit tests? Relevant methods for a unit test that will fail some of the time: [TestInitialize()] public void LogFileTestInitialize() { this.testFolder = System.Environment.GetFolderPath( System.Environment.SpecialFolder.LocalApplicationData ); this.testPath = this.testFolder + "\\empty.lfp"; System.IO.File.Create(this.testPath); } [TestMethod()] public void LogFileConstructorTest() { string filePath = this.testPath; LogFile target = new LogFile(filePath); Assert.AreNotEqual(null, target); Assert.AreEqual(this.testPath, target.filePath); Assert.AreEqual("empty.lfp", target.fileName); Assert.AreEqual(this.testFolder + "\\empty.lfp.lfpdat", target.metaPath); } [TestCleanup()] public void LogFileTestCleanup() { System.IO.File.Delete(this.testPath); } And the LogFile() constructor: public LogFile(String filePath) { this.entries = new List<Entry>(); this.filePath = filePath; this.metaPath = filePath + ".lfpdat"; this.fileName = filePath.Substring(filePath.LastIndexOf("\\") + 1); } The precise error message: Initialization method LogFileParserTester.LogFileTest.LogFileTestInitialize threw exception. System.IO.IOException: System.IO.IOException: The process cannot access the file 'C:\Users\<user>\AppData\Local\empty.lfp' because it is being used by another process..

    Read the article

  • Correct way of using/testing event service in Eclipse E4 RCP

    - by Thorsten Beck
    Allow me to pose two coupled questions that might boil down to one about good application design ;-) What is the best practice for using event based communication in an e4 RCP application? How can I write simple unit tests (using JUnit) for classes that send/receive events using dependency injection and IEventBroker ? Let’s be more concrete: say I am developing an Eclipse e4 RCP application consisting of several plugins that need to communicate. For communication I want to use the event service provided by org.eclipse.e4.core.services.events.IEventBroker so my plugins stay loosely coupled. I use dependency injection to inject the event broker to a class that dispatches events: @Inject static IEventBroker broker; private void sendEvent() { broker.post(MyEventConstants.SOME_EVENT, payload) } On the receiver side, I have a method like: @Inject @Optional private void receiveEvent(@UIEventTopic(MyEventConstants.SOME_EVENT) Object payload) Now the questions: In order for IEventBroker to be successfully injected, my class needs access to the current IEclipseContext. Most of my classes using the event service are not referenced by the e4 application model, so I have to manually inject the context on instantiation using e.g. ContextInjectionFactory.inject(myEventSendingObject, context); This approach works but I find myself passing around a lot of context to wherever I use the event service. Is this really the correct approach to event based communication across an E4 application? how can I easily write JUnit tests for a class that uses the event service (either as a sender or receiver)? Obviously, none of the above annotations work in isolation since there is no context available. I understand everyone’s convinced that dependency injection simplifies testability. But does this also apply to injecting services like the IEventBroker? This article describes creation of your own IEclipseContext to include the process of DI in tests. Not sure if this could resolve my 2nd issue but I also hesitate running all my tests as JUnit Plug-in tests as it appears impractible to fire up the PDE for each unit test. Maybe I just misunderstand the approach. This article speaks about “simply mocking IEventBroker”. Yes, that would be great! Unfortunately, I couldn’t find any information on how this can be achieved. All this makes me wonder whether I am still on a "good path" or if this is already a case of bad design? And if so, how would you go about redesigning? Move all event related actions to dedicated event sender/receiver classes or a dedicated plugin?

    Read the article

  • ZF-Autoloader not working in UnitTests on Ubuntu

    - by Sam
    i got a problem regarding Unit-testing a Zend-Framework application under Ubuntu 12.04. The project-structure is a default zend application whereas the models are defined as the following ./application ./models ./DbTable ./ProjectStatus.php (Application_Model_DbTable_ProjectStatus) ./Mappers ./ProjectStatus.php (Application_Model_Mapper_ProjectStatus) ./ProjectStatus.php (Application_Model_ProjectStatus) The Problem here is with the Zend-specific autoloading. The naming convention here appears that the folder Mappers loads all classes with _Mapper but not _Mappers. This is some internal Zend behavior which is fine so far. On my windows machine the phpunit runs without any Problems, trying to initiate all those classes. On my Ubuntu machine however with jenkins running on it, phpunit fails to find the appropriate classes giving me the following error Fatal error: Class 'Application_Model_Mapper_ProjectStatus' not found in /var/lib/jenkins/jobs/PAM/workspace/tests/application/models/Mapper/ProjectStatusTest.php on line 39 The error appears to really be that the Zend-Autoloader doesn't load from the ubuntu machine, but i can't figure out how or why this works. The question remains of why this is. I think i've double checked every point of contact with the zend autoloading stuff, but i just can't figure this out. I'll paste the - from my point of view relevant snippets - and hope someone of you has any insight to this. Jenkins Snippet for PHPUnit <target name="phpunit" description="Run unit tests with PHPUnit"> <exec executable="phpunit" failonerror="true"> <arg line="--configuration '${basedir}/tests/phpunit.xml' --coverage-clover '${basedir}/build/logs/clover.xml' --coverage-html '${basedir}/build/coverage/.' --log-junit '${basedir}/build/logs/junit.xml'" /> </exec> </target> ./tests/phpunit.xml <phpunit bootstrap="./bootstrap.php"> ... this shouldn't be of relevance ... </phpunit> ./tests/bootstrap.php <?php // Define path to application directory defined('APPLICATION_PATH') || define('APPLICATION_PATH', realpath(dirname(__FILE__) . '/../application')); // Define application environment defined('APPLICATION_ENV') || define('APPLICATION_ENV', (getenv('APPLICATION_ENV') ? getenv('APPLICATION_ENV') : 'testing')); // Ensure library/ is on include_path set_include_path(implode(PATH_SEPARATOR, array( realpath(APPLICATION_PATH . '/../library'), get_include_path(), ))); require_once 'Zend/Loader/Autoloader.php'; Zend_Loader_Autoloader::getInstance(); Any help will be appreciated.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44  | Next Page >