Search Results

Search found 381 results on 16 pages for 'mocking'.

Page 4/16 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Can someone please clarify my understanding of a mock's Verify concept?

    - by Pure.Krome
    Hi folks, I'm playing around with some unit tests and mocking. I'm trying to verify that some code, in my method, has been called. I don't think I understand the Verify part of mocking right, because I can only ever Verify main method .. which is silly because that is what I Act upon anyways. I'm trying to test that my logic is working - so I thought I use Verify to see that certain steps in the method have been reached and enacted upon. Lets use this example to highlight what I am doing wrong. public interface IAuthenticationService { bool Authenticate(string username, string password); SignOut(); } public class FormsAuthenticationService : IAuthenticationService { public bool Authenticate(string username, string password) { var user = _userService.FindSingle(x => x.UserName == username); if (user == null) return false; // Hash their password. var hashedPassword = EncodePassword(password, user.PasswordSalt); if (!hashedPassword.Equals(password, StringComparison.InvariantCulture)) return false; FormsAuthentication.SetAuthCookie(userName, true); return true; } } So now, I wish to verify that EncodePassword was called. FormsAuthentication.SetAuthCookie(..) was called. Now, I don't care about the implimentations of both of those. And more importantly, I do not want to test those methods. That has to be handled elsewhere. What I though I should do is Verify that those methods were called and .. if possible ... an expected result was returned. Is this the correct understanding of what 'Verify' means with mocking? If so, can someone show me how I can do this. Preferable with moq but i'm happy with anything. Cheers :)

    Read the article

  • Mocking HttpContext in .NET MVC2 using Moq

    - by Richard
    Hi, This was working in MVC 1, but has broken in MVC 2. I'm mocking the HttpContext so I can test routes. The code was originally taken from Steven Sanderson's book. I've tried mocking some extra properties as suggested in this comment but it hasn't fixed it. What am I missing? This is the start of my test code. routeData is null when this code completes. // Arange RouteCollection routeConfig = new RouteCollection(); MvcApplication.RegisterRoutes(routeConfig); var mockHttpContext = makeMockHttpContext(url); // Act RouteData routeData = routeConfig.GetRouteData(mockHttpContext.Object); This method creates my mock HttpContext: private static Mock<HttpContextBase> makeMockHttpContext(String url) { var mockHttpContext = new Mock<System.Web.HttpContextBase>(); // Mock the request var mockRequest = new Mock<HttpRequestBase>(); mockHttpContext.Setup(t => t.Request).Returns(mockRequest.Object); mockRequest.Setup(t => t.AppRelativeCurrentExecutionFilePath).Returns(url); // Tried adding these to fix in MVC2 (didn't work) mockRequest.Setup(r => r.HttpMethod).Returns("GET"); mockRequest.Setup(r => r.Headers).Returns(new NameValueCollection()); mockRequest.Setup(r => r.Form).Returns(new NameValueCollection()); mockRequest.Setup(r => r.QueryString).Returns(new NameValueCollection()); mockRequest.Setup(r => r.Files).Returns(new Mock<HttpFileCollectionBase>().Object); // Mock the response var mockResponse = new Mock<HttpResponseBase>(); mockHttpContext.Setup(t => t.Response).Returns(mockResponse.Object); mockResponse.Setup(t => t.ApplyAppPathModifier(It.IsAny<String>())).Returns<String>(t => t); return mockHttpContext; }

    Read the article

  • How to mock HTTPSession/FlexSession with TestNG and some Mocking Framework

    - by ifischer
    I'm developing a web application running on Tomcat 6, with Flex as Frontend. I'm testing my backend with TestNG. Currently, I'm trying to test the following method in my Java-Backend: public UserPE login(String mail, String password) { UserPE dbuser = findUserByMail(mail); if (dbuser == null || !dbuser.getPassword().equals(password)) throw new RuntimeException("Invalid username and/or password"); // Save logged in user FlexSession session = FlexContext.getFlexSession(); session.setAttribute("user", dbuser); return dbuser; } The method needs access to the FlexContext which only exists when i run it on the Servlet container (don't bother if you don't know Flex, it's more a Java-Mocking question in general). Otherwise i get a Nullpointer exception when calling session.setAttribute(). Unfortunately, I cannot set the FlexContext from outside, which would make me able to set it from my tests. It's just obtained inside the method. What would be the best way to test this method with a Mocking framework, without changing the method or the class which includes the method? And which framework would be the easiest for this use case (there are hardly other things i have to mock in my app, it's pretty simple)? Sorry I could try out all of them for myself and see how i could get this to work, but i hope that i'll get a quickstart with some good advices!

    Read the article

  • Mocking with Boost::Test

    - by Billy ONeal
    Hello everyone :) I'm using the Boost::Test library for unit testing, and I've in general been hacking up my own mocking solutions that look something like this: //In header for clients struct RealFindFirstFile { static HANDLE FindFirst(LPCWSTR lpFileName, LPWIN32_FIND_DATAW lpFindFileData) { return FindFirstFile(lpFileName, lpFindFileData); }; }; template <typename FirstFile_T = RealFindFirstFile> class DirectoryIterator { //.. Implementation } //In unit tests (cpp) #define THE_ANSWER_TO_LIFE_THE_UNIVERSE_AND_EVERYTHING 42 struct FakeFindFirstFile { static HANDLE FindFirst(LPCWSTR lpFileName, LPWIN32_FIND_DATAW lpFindFileData) { return THE_ANSWER_TO_LIFE_THE_UNIVERSE_AND_EVERYTHING; }; }; BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE( MyTest ) { DirectoryIterator<FakeFindFirstFile> LookMaImMocked; //Test } I've grown frustrated with this because it requires that I implement almost everything as a template, and it is a lot of boilerplate code to achieve what I'm looking for. Is there a good method of mocking up code using Boost::Test over my Ad-hoc method? I've seen several people recommend Google Mock, but it requires a lot of ugly hacks if your functions are not virtual, which I would like to avoid. Oh: One last thing. I don't need assertions that a particular piece of code was called. I simply need to be able to inject data that would normally be returned by Windows API functions.

    Read the article

  • What C# mocking framework to use?

    - by Corin
    I want to start using mock objects on my next C# project. After a quick google I've found there are many: NMock EasyMock.NET TypeMock Isolator Commercial / Paid Rhino Mocks Moq So my question is: what one is your favourite .NET mocking framework and why?

    Read the article

  • C++ Mock/Test boost::asio::io_stream - based Asynch Handler

    - by rbellamy
    I've recently returned to C/C++ after years of C#. During those years I've found the value of Mocking and Unit testing. Finding resources for Mocks and Units tests in C# is trivial. WRT Mocking, not so much with C++. I would like some guidance on what others do to mock and test Asynch io_service handlers with boost. For instance, in C# I would use a MemoryStream to mock an IO.Stream, and am assuming this is the path I should take here. C++ Mock/Test best practices boost::asio::io_service Mock/Test best practices C++ Async Handler Mock/Test best practices I've started the process with googlemock and googletest.

    Read the article

  • rspec mocks: verify expectations in it "should" methods?

    - by Derick Bailey
    I'm trying to use rspec's mocking to setup expectations that I can verify in the it "should" methods... but I don't know how to do this... when i call the .should_receive methods on the mock, it verifies the expected call as soon as the before :all method exits. here's a small example: describe Foo, "when doing something" do before :all do Bar.should_recieve(:baz) foo = Foo.new foo.create_a_Bar_and_call_baz end it "should call the bar method" do # ??? what do i do here? end end How can i verify the expected call in the 'it "should"' method? do i need to use mocha or another mocking framework instead of rspec's? or ???

    Read the article

  • Recursive mocking with Rhino-Mocks

    - by jaspernygaard
    Hi I'm trying to unittest several MVP implementations and can't quite figure out the best way to mock the view. I'll try to boil it down. The view IView consists e.g. of a property of type IControl. interface IView { IControl Control1 { get; } IControl Control2 { get; } } interface IControl { bool Enabled { get; set; } object Value { get; set; } } My question is whether there's a simple way to setup the property behavior for Enabled and Value on the IControl interface members on the IView interface - like recursive mocking a guess. I would rather not setup expectations for all my properties on the view (quite a few on each view). Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • mocking static method call to c# library class

    - by Joe
    This seems like an easy enough issue but I can't seem to find the keywords to effect my searches. I'm trying to unit test by mocking out all objects within this method call. I am able to do so to all of my own creations except for this one: public void MyFunc(MyVarClass myVar) { Image picture; ... picture = Image.FromStream(new MemoryStream(myVar.ImageStream)); ... } FromStream is a static call from the Image class (part of c#). So how can I refactor my code to mock this out because I really don't want to provide a image stream to the unit test.

    Read the article

  • Request for advice about class design, inheritance/aggregation

    - by Lasse V. Karlsen
    I have started writing my own WebDAV server class in .NET, and the first class I'm starting with is a WebDAVListener class, modelled after how the HttpListener class works. Since I don't want to reimplement the core http protocol handling, I will use HttpListener for all its worth, and thus I have a question. What would the suggested way be to handle this: Implement all the methods and properties found inside HttpListener, just changing the class types where it matters (ie. the GetContext + EndGetContext methods would return a different class for WebDAV contexts), and storing and using a HttpListener object internally Construct WebDAVListener by passing it a HttpListener class to use? Create a wrapper for HttpListener with an interface, and constrct WebDAVListener by passing it an object implementing this interface? If going the route of passing a HttpListener (disguised or otherwise) to the WebDAVListener, would you expose the underlying listener object through a property, or would you expect the program that used the class to keep a reference to the underlying HttpListener? Also, in this case, would you expose some of the methods of HttpListener through the WebDAVListener, like Start and Stop, or would you again expect the program that used it to keep the HttpListener reference around for all those things? My initial reaction tells me that I want a combination. For one thing, I would like my WebDAVListener class to look like a complete implementation, hiding the fact that there is a HttpListener object beneath it. On the other hand, I would like to build unit-tests without actually spinning up a networked server, so some kind of mocking ability would be nice to have as well, which suggests I would like the interface-wrapper way. One way I could solve this would be this: public WebDAVListener() : WebDAVListener(new HttpListenerWrapper()) { } public WebDAVListener(IHttpListenerWrapper listener) { } And then I would implement all the methods of HttpListener (at least all those that makes sense) in my own class, by mostly just chaining the call to the underlying HttpListener object. What do you think? Final question: If I go the way of the interface, assuming the interface maps 1-to-1 onto the HttpListener class, and written just to add support for mocking, is such an interface called a wrapper or an adapter?

    Read the article

  • Need an advice for unit testing using mock object

    - by Andree
    Hi there, I just recently read about "Mocking objects" for unit testing and currently I'm having a difficulties implementing this approach in my application. Please let me explain my problem. I have a User model class, which is dependent on 2 data sources (database and facebook web service). The controller class simply use this User model as an interface to access data and it doesn't care about where the data came from. Currently I never done any unit test to this User model because it is dependent on an external web service. But just a while ago, I read about object mocking and now I know that it is a common approach to unit test a class that depends on external resources (like in my case). Now I want to create a unit test for the User model, but then I encountered a design issue: In order for the User model to use a mocked Facebook SDK, I have to inject this mocked Facebook SDK to the User object (probably using a setter). Therefore I can't construct the Facebook SDK inside the User object. I have to construct it outside the User object, and inject the SDK into the User object. The real client of my User model is the application's controller. Therefore I have to construct the Facebook SDK inside the controller and inject it to the user object. Well, this is a problem because I want my controller to be as clean as possible. I want my controller to be ignorant about the application's data source. I'm not good at explaining something systematically, so you'll probably sleeping before reading this last paragraph. But anyway, I want to ask if anyone here ever encountered the same problem as mine? How do you solve this problem? Regards, Andree

    Read the article

  • Passing System classes as constructor parameters

    - by mcl
    This is probably crazy. I want to take the idea of Dependency Injection to extremes. I have isolated all System.IO-related behavior into a single class so that I can mock that class in my other classes and thereby relieve my larger suite of unit tests of the burden of worrying about the actual file system. But the File IO class I end up with can only be tested with integration tests, which-- of course-- introduces complexity I don't really want to deal with when all I really want to do is make sure my FileIO class calls the correct System.IO stuff. I don't need to integration test System.IO. My FileIO class is doing more than simply wrapping System.IO functions, every now and then it does contain some logic (maybe this is the problem?). So what I'd like is to be able to test my File IO class to ensure that it makes the correct system calls by mocking the System.IO classes themselves. Ideally this would be as easy as having a constructor like so: public FileIO( System.IO.Directory directory, System.IO.File file, System.IO.FileStream fileStream ) { this.Directory = directory; this.File = file; this.FileStream = fileStream; } And then calling in methods like: public GetFilesInFolder(string folderPath) { return this.Directory.GetFiles(folderPath) } But this doesn't fly since the System.IO classes in question are static classes. As far as I can tell they can neither be instantiated in this way or subclassed for the purposes of mocking.

    Read the article

  • Mocking WebResponse's from a WebRequest

    - by Rob Cooper
    I have finally started messing around with creating some apps that work with RESTful web interfaces, however, I am concerned that I am hammering their servers every time I hit F5 to run a series of tests.. Basically, I need to get a series of web responses so I can test I am parsing the varying responses correctly, rather than hit their servers every time, I thought I could do this once, save the XML and then work locally. However, I don't see how I can "mock" a WebResponse, since (AFAIK) they can only be instantiated by WebRequest.GetResponse How do you guys go about mocking this sort of thing? Do you? I just really don't like the fact I am hammering their servers :S I dont want to change the code too much, but I expect there is a elegant way of doing this.. Update Following Accept Will's answer was the slap in the face I needed, I knew I was missing a fundamental point! Create an Interface that will return a proxy object which represents the XML. Implement the interface twice, on that uses WebRequest, the other that returns static "responses". The interface implmentation then either instantiates the return type based on the response, or the static XML. You can then pass the required class when testing or at production to the service layer. Once I have the code knocked up, I'll paste some samples. Thanks Will :)

    Read the article

  • Rhino Mocks - Fluent Mocking - Expect.Call question

    - by Ben Cawley
    Hi, I'm trying to use the fluent mocking style of Rhino.Mocks and have the following code that works on a mock IDictionary object called 'factories': With.Mocks(_Repository).Expecting(() => { Expect.Call(() => factories.ContainsKey(Arg<String>.Is.Anything)); LastCall.Return(false); Expect.Call(() => factories.Add(Arg<String>.Is.Anything, Arg<Object>.Is.Anything)); }).Verify(() => { _Service = new ObjectRequestService(factories); _Service.RegisterObjectFactory(Valid_Factory_Key, factory); }); Now, the only way I have been able to set the return value of the ContainsKey call is to use LastCall.Return(true) on the following line. I'm sure I'm mixing styles here as Expect.Call() has a .Return(Expect.Action) method but I can't figure out how I am suppose to use it correctly to return a boolean value? Can anyone help out? Hope the question is clear enough - let me know if anyone needs more info! Cheers, Ben

    Read the article

  • Mocking HtmlHelper throws NullReferenceException

    - by Matt Austin
    I know that there are a few questions on StackOverflow on this topic but I haven't been able to get any of the suggestions to work for me. I've been banging my head against this for two days now so its time to ask for help... The following code snippit is a simplified unit test to demonstrate what I'm trying to do, which is basically call RadioButtonFor in the Microsoft.Web.Mvc assembly in a unit test. var model = new SendMessageModel { SendMessageType = SendMessageType.Member }; var vd = new ViewDataDictionary(model); vd.TemplateInfo = new TemplateInfo { HtmlFieldPrefix = string.Empty }; var controllerContext = new ControllerContext(new Mock<HttpContextBase>().Object, new RouteData(), new Mock<ControllerBase>().Object); var viewContext = new Mock<ViewContext>(new object[] { controllerContext, new Mock<IView>().Object, vd, new TempDataDictionary(), new Mock<TextWriter>().Object }); viewContext.Setup(v => v.View).Returns(new Mock<IView>().Object); viewContext.Setup(v => v.ViewData).Returns(vd).Callback(() => {throw new Exception("ViewData extracted");}); viewContext.Setup(v => v.TempData).Returns(new TempDataDictionary()); viewContext.Setup(v => v.Writer).Returns(new Mock<TextWriter>().Object); viewContext.Setup(v => v.RouteData).Returns(new RouteData()); viewContext.Setup(v => v.HttpContext).Returns(new Mock<HttpContextBase>().Object); viewContext.Setup(v => v.Controller).Returns(new Mock<ControllerBase>().Object); viewContext.Setup(v => v.FormContext).Returns(new FormContext()); var mockContainer = new Mock<IViewDataContainer>(); mockContainer.Setup(x => x.ViewData).Returns(vd); var helper = new HtmlHelper<ISendMessageModel>(viewContext.Object, mockContainer.Object, new RouteCollection()); helper.RadioButtonFor(m => m.SendMessageType, "Member", cssClass: "selector"); If I remove the cssClass parameter then the code works ok but fails consistently when adding additional parameters. I've tried every combination of mocking, instantiating concrete types and using fakes that I can think off but I always get a NullReferenceException when I call RadioButtonFor. Any help hugely appreciated!!

    Read the article

  • Book Recommendation for OO design and TDD

    - by whatispunk
    I know there are a ton of books available on the subject but I want one that is recent and describes OOD in terms of TDD, dependency injection, IoC containers, and mocking frameworks. I realize this question is subjective, but I trust in the opinions of SO-ers and am having difficult using Google to provide any real results. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Google Mock for iPhone development?

    - by Cliff
    I have an interesting situation where I am refactoring a bunch of ObjC iPhone code to create a C++ API. I'm a novice to C++ and looking into C++ mocking frameworks to augment the work I'd done using OCUnit and poor man's mocks. I ran across googlemock and wanted to know if anyone has ever used it for iPhone development? Also, how can I share this (or mockpp) with other devs as it is an installable package and doesn't seem to lend itself to checking into a repository?

    Read the article

  • How to get started with testing(jMock)

    - by London
    Hello, I'm trying to learn how to write tests. I'm also learning Java, I was told I should learn/use/practice jMock, I've found some articles online that help to certain extend like : http://www.theserverside.com/news/1365050/Using-JMock-in-Test-Driven-Development http://jeantessier.com/SoftwareEngineering/Mocking.html#jMock And most articles I found was about test driven development, write tests first then write code to make the test pass. I'm not looking for that at the moment, I'm trying to write tests for already existing code with jMock. The official documentation is vague to say the least and just too hard for me. Does anybody have better way to learn this. Good books/links/tutorials would help me a lot. thank you EDIT - more concrete question : http://jeantessier.com/SoftwareEngineering/Mocking.html#jMock - from this article Tried this to mock this simple class : import java.util.Map; public class Cache { private Map<Integer, String> underlyingStorage; public Cache(Map<Integer, String> underlyingStorage) { this.underlyingStorage = underlyingStorage; } public String get(int key) { return underlyingStorage.get(key); } public void add(int key, String value) { underlyingStorage.put(key, value); } public void remove(int key) { underlyingStorage.remove(key); } public int size() { return underlyingStorage.size(); } public void clear() { underlyingStorage.clear(); } } Here is how I tried to create a test/mock : public class CacheTest extends TestCase { private Mockery context; private Map mockMap; private Cache cache; @Override @Before public void setUp() { context = new Mockery() { { setImposteriser(ClassImposteriser.INSTANCE); } }; mockMap = context.mock(Map.class); cache = new Cache(mockMap); } public void testCache() { context.checking(new Expectations() {{ atLeast(1).of(mockMap).size(); will(returnValue(int.class)); }}); } } It passes the test and basically does nothing, what I wanted is to create a map and check its size, and you know work some variations try to get a grip on this. Understand better trough examples, what else could I test here or any other exercises would help me a lot. tnx

    Read the article

  • Typemock - Worth the money?

    - by AngryHacker
    I know that this is a subjective question... Typemock is $799 per developer. Licences for 5 devs comes up to a pretty large sum. If someone here used Typemock and given that there are open source mocking frameworks, is it worth the money? Why?

    Read the article

  • How should I pass an object wrapping an API to a class using that API?

    - by Billy ONeal
    Hello everyone :) This is a revised/better written version of the question I asked earlier today -- that question is deleted now. I have a project where I'm getting started with Google Mock. I have created a class, and that class calls functions whithin the Windows API. I've also created a wrapper class with virtual functions wrapping the Windows API, as described in the Google Mock CheatSheet. I'm confused however at how I should pass the wrapper into my class that uses that object. Obviously that object needs to be polymorphic, so I can't pass it by value, forcing me to pass a pointer. That in and of itself is not a problem, but I'm confused as to who should own the pointer to the class wrapping the API. So... how should I pass the wrapper class into the real class to facilitate mocking?

    Read the article

  • Should methods containing LINQ expressions be tested / mocked?

    - by Phil.Wheeler
    Assuming I have a class with a method that takes a System.Linq.Expressions.Expression as a parameter, how much value is there in unit testing it? public void IEnumerable<T> Find(Expression expression) { return someCollection.Where(expression).ToList(); } Unit testing or mocking these sorts of methods has been a mind-frying experience for me and I'm now at the point where I have to wonder whether it's all just not worth it. How would I unit test this method using some arbitrary expression like List<Animal> = myAnimalRepository.Find(x => x.Species == "Cat");

    Read the article

  • Is unit testing the definition of an interface necessary?

    - by HackedByChinese
    I have occasionally heard or read about people asserting their interfaces in a unit test. I don't mean mocking an interface for use in another type's test, but specifically creating a test to accompany the interface. Consider this ultra-lame and off-the-cuff example: public interface IDoSomething { string DoSomething(); } and the test: [TestFixture] public class IDoSomethingTests { [Test] public void DoSomething_Should_Return_Value() { var mock = new Mock<IDoSomething>(); var actualValue = mock.Expect(m => m.DoSomething()).Returns("value"); mock.Object.DoSomething(); mock.Verify(m => DoSomething()); Assert.AreEqual("value", actualValue); } } I suppose the idea is to use the test to drive the design of the interface and also to provide guidance for implementors on what's expected so they can draw good tests of their own. Is this a common (recommended) practice?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >