Search Results

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

Page 4/769 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• Seeking recommendations on automated test framework for C

  - by Hissohathair

  I'm writing some code (some of which uses W3C's libwww) in C. It's been a while since I've touched ANSI C. Back in the day we rolled our own test framework. Does anybody here have any test frameworks that they recommend for C programming? Googling around I was inclined to go with Check. It has a page on other unit testing frameworks in C, a few of which I've taken a quick look at. GNU AutoUnit seemed like it might be a good choice since I'm using the GNU build tools (autoconf, automake) but it doesn't look that alive... Another option would be to use a C++ framework and just write my tests in C++ Anyway, any experienced opinions would be appreciated. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Automated testing tool development challenges (for embedded software)

  - by Karthi prime

  My boss want to come up with the proposal for the following tool: An IDE: Able to build, compile, debug, via JTAG programming for the micro-controller. A Test Suite, reads the code in the IDE, auto generates the test cases, and it gives the in-target unit testing results(which is done by controlling code execution in the micro-controller via IDE). A no-overhead code coverage tool which interacts with the test suite and IDE. My work is to obtain the high level architecture of this tool, so as to proceed further. My current knowledge: There are tool-chains available from the chip manufacturer for the micro-controllers which can be utilized along with an open-source IDE like Eclipse, and along with an open-source burner, a complete IDE for a micro-controller can be done. Test cases can be auto-generated by reading the source file through the process of parsing, scripting, based on keywords. Test suite must be able to command the IDE to control, through breakpoints, and read the register contents from the microcontroller - This enables the in-target unit testing. An no-overhead code coverage should be done by no-overhead code instrumentation so as to execute those in the resource constraint environment of the micro-controller. I have the following questions: Any advice on the validity of my understanding? What are the challenges I will have during the development? What are the helpful open-source tools regarding this? What is the development time for this software? Thanks

  Read the article

• Automated Qt testing framework

  - by user1457565

  Can someone recommend a good robust "Free" testing framework for Qt? Our requirements: Should be able to test basic mouse click / mouse move events SHould be able to handle non-widget view components Should have "record" capability to generate test scripts. Should be automatable for running it daily. We looked at: Squish - this solves all our problems. But it is just too da** expensive. KD Executor - the download page now links to the squish page and says thats what they recommend for testing. Not sure what they mean by that. TDriver - from nokia.qt. Super difficult to install. Very little documentation. Having a hard time to just install. I wonder how much harder it would be to write tests. qtestlib - Could not handle non-widget components. Everything has to be a widget to be tested. No "record" feature. Can someone help with any other alternative ? thanks Mouli

  Read the article

• Having Many Problems with Jquery UI 1.8.1 Dialog.js

  - by chobo2

  Hi I been using the jquery ui for quite a while now. This is the first time using 1.8 though and I am not sure why but it seems to me this plugin has taken steps backwards. I never had so much difficulty to use the Jquery UI as I am having now. First the documentation is out of date. Dependencies * UI Core * UI Draggable (Optional) * UI Resizable (Optional) After line 20mins of trying and getting error after error (like dialog is not a function) I realized that you need some other javascript file called "widget.js" So now I have Jquery 1.4.2.js UI Core.js UI Widget.js UI Dialog.js all on my page. I then did something like this $('#Delete').click(function () { var dialogId = "DeleteDialogBox"; var createdDialog = MakeDialogBox(dialogId, "Delete Conformation"); $('#tabConent').after(createdDialog); dialogId = String.format('#{0}', dialogId); $(dialogId).dialog({ resizable: true, height: 500, width: 500, modal: true, buttons: { 'Delete all items': function() { $(this).dialog('close'); }, Cancel: function() { $(this).dialog('close'); } } }); }); function MakeDialogBox(id, title) { var dialog = String.format('<div id="{0}" title="{1}"></div>', id, title); return dialog; } Now what this should be doing is it makes a where the dialog box should go. After that it should put it right after my tabs. So when watching it with firebug it does this. However once does the .dialog() method it moves the + all the stuff it generates and puts it after my footer. So now I have my dialog box under my footer tucked away in the bottom right hand corner. I want it dead in the center. In previous versions I don't think it mattered where the dialog code was on your page it would always be dead center. So what am I missing? The center.js(I don't know if this exists but seems like you need 100 javascript files now to get this to work proper).

  Read the article

• WebCenter 11g UI Examples

  - by john.brunswick

  Anyone interested in learning more manipulating the WebCenter UI should definitely stop by John Sim's blog. He has produced an excellent set of UI examples and details around how he achieved them. Definitely stay tuned to see what else John produces! WebCenter UI Customization Examples

  Read the article

• Mock Objects for Unit Testing

  - by user9009

  Hello How often QA engineers are responsible for developing Mock Objects for Unit Testing. So dealing with Mock Objects is just developer job ?. The reason i ask is i'm interested in QA as my career and am learning tools like JUnit , TestNG and couple of frameworks. I just want to know until what level of unit testing is done by developer and from what point QA engineer takes over testing for better test coverage ? Thanks

  Read the article

• Development processes, the use of version control, and unit-testing

  - by ct01

  Preface I've worked at quite a few "flat" organizations in my time. Most of the version control policy/process has been "only commit after it's been tested". We were constantly committing at each place to "trunk" (cvs/svn). The same was true with unit-testing - it's always been a "we need to do this" mentality but it never really materializes in a substantive form b/c there is no institutional knowledge base to do it - no mentorship. Version Control The emphasis for version control management at one place was a very strict protocol for commit messages (format & content). The other places let employees just do "whatever". The branching, tagging, committing, rolling back, and merging aspect of things was always ill defined and almost never used. This sort of seems to leave the version control system in the position of being a fancy file-storage mechanism with a meta-data component that never really gets accessed/utilized. (The same was true for unit testing and committing code to the source tree) Unit tests It seems there's a prevailing "we must/should do this" mentality in most places I've worked. As a policy or standard operating procedure it never gets implemented because there seems to be a very ill-defined understanding about what that means, what is going to be tested, and how to do it. Summary It seems most places I've been to think version control and unit testing is "important" b/c the trendy trade journals say it is but, if there's very little mentorship to use these tools or any real business policies, then the full power of version control/unit testing is never really expressed. So grunts, like myself, never really have a complete understanding of the point beyond that "it's a good thing" and "we should do it". Question I was wondering if there are blogs, books, white-papers, or online journals about what one could call the business process or "standard operating procedures" or uses cases for version control and unit testing? I want to know more than the trade journals tell me and get serious about doing these things. PS: @Henrik Hansen had a great comment about the lack of definition for the question. I'm not interested in a specific unit-testing/versioning product or methodology (like, XP) - my interest is more about work-flow at the individual team/developer level than evangelism. This is more-or-less a by product of the management situation I've operated under more than a lack of reading software engineering books or magazines about development processes. A lot of what I've seen/read is more marketing oriented material than any specifically enumerated description of "well, this is how our shop operates".

  Read the article

• How to Restore Uninstalled Modern UI Apps that Ship with Windows 8

  - by Lori Kaufman

  Windows 8 ships with built-in apps available on the Modern UI screen (formerly the Metro or Start screen), such as Mail, Calendar, Photos, Music, Maps, and Weather. Installing additional Modern UI apps is easy using the Windows Store, and uninstalling apps is just as easy. What if you accidentally uninstall a built-in app? It can be easily restored with a few clicks of your mouse. To begin, access the Modern UI screen by moving your mouse to the extreme, lower, left corner of the screen and click the Start screen button that displays. NOTE: You can also press the Windows key to access the Modern UI screen. How Hackers Can Disguise Malicious Programs With Fake File Extensions Can Dust Actually Damage My Computer? What To Do If You Get a Virus on Your Computer

  Read the article

• Advancing Code Review and Unit Testing Practice

  - by Graviton

  As a team lead managing a group of developers with no experience ( and see no need) in code review and unit testing, how can you advance code review and unit testing practice? How are you going to create a way so that code review and unit testing to naturally fit into the developer's flow? One of the resistance of these two areas is that "we are always tight on dateline, so no time for code review and unit testing". Another resistance for code review is that we currently don't know how to do it. Should we review the code upon every check-in, or review the code at a specified date?

  Read the article

• unit testing variable state explicit tests in dynamically typed languages

  - by kris welsh

  I have heard that a desirable quality of unit tests is that they test for each scenario independently. I realised whilst writing tests today that when you compare a variable with another value in a statement like: assertEquals("foo", otherObject.stringFoo); You are really testing three things: The variable you are testing exists and is within scope. The variable you are testing is the expected type. The variable you are testing's value is what you expect it to be. Which to me raises the question of whether you should test for each of these implicitly so that a test fail would occur on the specific line that tests for that problem: assertTrue(stringFoo); assertTrue(stringFoo.typeOf() == "String"); assertEquals("foo", otherObject.stringFoo); For example if the variable was an integer instead of a string the test case failure would be on line 2 which would give you more feedback on what went wrong. Should you test for this kind of thing explicitly or am i overthinking this?

  Read the article

• Testing loses its effectiveness if all programmers don't use them

  - by Jeff O

  Let's assume you are convinced that the extra time spent unit testing has merit and improves production. Does that still hold up when everyone working on the same code doesn't use them? This question makes me wonder if fixing tests that everyone doesn't use is a waste of time. If you correct a test so the new code will pass, you're assuming the new code is correct. The person updating the test better have a firm understanding of the reasoning behind the code change and decide if the test or the new code needs to be fixed. This much inconsistency in a team when it comes to testing is probably an indication of other problems as well. There is a certain amount of risk involved that someone else on the team will alter code that is covered by testing. Is this the point where testing becomes counter-productive?

  Read the article

• Is verification and validation part of testing process?

  - by user970696

  Based on many sources I do not believe the simple definition that aim of testing is to find as many bugs as possible - we test to ensure that it works or that it does not. E.g. followint are goals of testing form ISTQB: Determine that (software products) satisfy specified requirements ( I think its verificication) Demonstrate that (software products) are fit for purpose (I think that is validation) Detect defects I would agree that testing is verification, validation and defect detection. Is that correct?

  Read the article

• JUnit Testing in Multithread Application

  - by e2bady

  This is a problem me and my team faces in almost all of the projects. Testing certain parts of the application with JUnit is not easy and you need to start early and to stick to it, but that's not the question I'm asking. The actual problem is that with n-Threads, locking, possible exceptions within the threads and shared objects the task of testing is not as simple as testing the class, but testing them under endless possible situations within threading. To be more precise, let me tell you about the design of one of our applications: When a user makes a request several threads are started that each analyse a part of the data to complete the analysis, these threads run a certain time depending on the size of the chunk of data (which are endless and of uncertain quality) to analyse, or they may fail if the data was insufficient/lacking quality. After each completed its analysis they call upon a handler which decides after each thread terminates if the collected analysis-data is sufficient to deliver an answer to the request. All of these analysers share certain parts of the applications (some parts because the instances are very big and only a certain number can be loaded into memory and those instances are reusable, some parts because they have a standing connection, where connecting takes time, ex.gr. sql connections) so locking is very common (done with reentrant-locks). While the applications runs very efficient and fast, it's not very easy to test it under real-world conditions. What we do right now is test each class and it's predefined conditions, but there are no automated tests for interlocking and synchronization, which in my opionion is not very good for quality insurances. Given this example how would you handle testing the threading, interlocking and synchronization?

  Read the article

• Database unit testing is now available for SSDT

  - by jamiet

  Good news was announced yesterday for those that are using SSDT and want to write unit tests, unit testing functionality is now available. The announcement was made on the SSDT team blog in post Available Today: SSDT—December 2012. Here are a few thoughts about this news. Firstly, there seems to be a general impression that database unit testing was not previously available for SSDT – that’s not entirely true. Database unit testing was most recently delivered in Visual Studio 2010 and any database unit tests written therein work perfectly well against SQL Server databases created using SSDT (why wouldn’t they – its just a database after all). In other words, if you’re running SSDT inside Visual Studio 2010 then you could carry on freely writing database unit tests; some of the tight integration between the two (e.g. right-click on an object in SQL Server Object Explorer and choose to create a unit test) was not there – but I’ve never found that to be a problem. I am currently working on a project that uses SSDT for database development and have been happily running VS2010 database unit tests for a few months now. All that being said, delivery of database unit testing for SSDT is now with us and that is good news, not least because we now have the ability to create unit tests in VS2012. We also get tight integration with SSDT itself, the like of which I mentioned above. Having now had a look at the new features I was delighted to find that one of my big complaints about database unit testing has been solved. As I reported here on Connect a refactor operation would cause unit test code to get completely mangled. See here the before and after from such an operation: SELECT    * FROM    bi.ProcessMessageLog pml INNER JOIN bi.[LogMessageType] lmt     ON    pml.[LogMessageTypeId] = lmt.[LogMessageTypeId] WHERE    pml.[LogMessage] = 'Ski[LogMessageTypeName]of message: IApplicationCanceled' AND        lmt.[LogMessageType] = 'Warning'; which is obviously not ideal. Thankfully that seems to have been solved with this latest release. One disappointment about this new release is that the process for running tests as part of a CI build has not changed from the horrendously complicated process required previously. Check out my blog post Setting up database unit testing as part of a Continuous Integration build process [VS2010 DB Tools - Datadude] for instructions on how to do it. In that blog post I describe it as “fiddly” – I was being kind when I said that! @Jamiet

  Read the article

• Mock Objects for Testing - Test Automation Engineer Perspective

  - by user9009

  Hello How often QA engineers are responsible for developing Mock Objects for Unit Testing. So dealing with Mock Objects is just developer job ?. The reason i ask is i'm interested in QA as my career and am learning tools like JUnit , TestNG and couple of frameworks. I just want to know until what level of unit testing is done by developer and from what point QA engineer takes over testing for better test coverage ? Thanks Edit : Based on the answers below am providing more details about what QA i was referring to . I'm interested in more of Test Automation rather than simple QA involved in record and play of script. So Test Automation engineers are responsible for developing frameworks ? or do they have a team of developers dedicated in Framework development ? Yes i was asking about usage of Mock Objects for testing from Test Automation engineer perspective.

  Read the article

• CppUnit for unit-testing executable files?

  - by hagubear

  I am not sure if anyone has done it. I am trying to do something that is in general, uncommon i.e. unit-testing executable (Windows) or ELFs (Linux). I know that CppUnit provides a good unit testing facility, but I have never used it for unit-testing (used UnitTest++). I hear rumours that you can unit-test executables too. Does anyone have the experience in this? A relevant post regarding the philosophy of it was here

  Read the article

• Automated tests for differencing algorithm

  - by Matthew Rodatus

  We are designing a differencing algorithm (based on Longest Common Subsequence) that compares a source text and a modified copy to extract the new content (i.e. content that is only in the modified copy). I'm currently compiling a library of test case data. We need to be able to run automated tests that verify the test cases, but we don't want to verify strict accuracy. Given the heuristic nature of our algorithm, we need our test pass/failures to be fuzzy. We want to specify a threshold of overlap between the desired result and the actual result (i.e. the content that is extracted). I have a few sketches in my mind as to how to solve this, but has anyone done this before? Does anyone have guidance or ideas about how to do this effectively?

  Read the article

• Scenario to illustrate how unit testing leads to better design

  - by Cocowalla

  For an internal training session, I'm trying to come up with a simple scenario that illustrates how unit testing leads to better design, by forcing you to think about things like coupling before you start coding. The idea is that I get the participants to code something first, without considering unit testing, then we do it again, but considering unit testing. Hopefully the code produced second time round should be more decoupled and maintainable. I'm struggling to come up with a scenario that can be coded quickly, yet can still demonstrate how unit testing can lead to better overall design.

  Read the article

• Code testing practice

  - by Robin Castlin

  So now I have come to the conclusion like many others that having some way of constantly testing your code is good practice since it enables fewer people to be involved (colleges and customers alike) by simply knowing what's wrong before someone else finds out the hard way. I've heard and read some about Unit Testing and understand what it's supposed to do and all. The there are so many different types of bugs. It can be everything from web browser not being able not being able to send correct values, javascript failing, a global function messing up a piece of code somewhere to a change that looked good when testing it out but fails in some special case which was hard to anticipate. My simply finding these errors I learn to rarely repeat them again, but there seems to always be new bugs to be found and learnt from. I would guess maybe the best practice would be to run every page and it's functions a couple of times, witness the result and repeat this in Firefox, Chrome and Internet Explorer (and all smartphones apparently) to make sure it works as intended. However this would take quite some time to do consider I don't work with patches/versions and do little fixes here and there a couple of times per week. What I prefer would be some kind of page I can just load that tests as much things as possible to make sure the site works as intended. Basicly just run a lot of cURL's with POST-values and see if I get expected result. But how would I preferably not increase the IDs of every mysql rows if I delete these testing rows? It feels silly to be on ID 1000 with maybe 50 rows in total. If I could build a new project from scratch I would probably implement some kind of smooth way to return a "TRUE" on testing instead of the actual page. But this solution would for the moment being have to be passed on existing projects. My question What would you recommend to be the best way to test my site to make sure that existing functions does their job upon editing the code? Should I consider to implement a lot of edits first, then test manually the entire code to make sure it still works? Is there any nice way of testing codes without "hurting" the ID columns? Extra thoughs Would it be a good idea to associate all of my files to the different parts of my site which they affect? For instance if I edit home.php I will through documentation test if my homepage's start works as intended since it's the only part of my site it should affect.

  Read the article

• What is the aim of software testing?

  - by user970696

  Having read many books, there is a basic contradiction: Some say, "the goal of testing is to find bugs" while other say "the goal of the testing is to equalize the quality of the product", meaning that bugs are its by-products. I would also agree that if testing would be aimed primarily on a bug hunt, who would do the actual verification and actually provided the information, that the software is ready? Even e.g. Kaner changed his original definiton of testing goal from bug hunting to quality assesement provision but I still cannot see the clear difference. I percieve both as equally important. I can verify software by its specification to make sure it works and in that case, bugs found are just by products. But also I perform tests just to brake things. Also what definition is more accurate?

  Read the article

• Performance Testing Versus Unit Testing

  - by Mystagogue

  I'm reading Osherove's "The Art of Unit Testing," and though I've not yet seen him say anything about performance testing, two thoughts still cross my mind: Performance tests generally can't be unit tests, because performance tests generally need to run for long periods of time. Performance tests generally can't be unit tests, because performance issues too often manifest at an integration or system level (or at least the logic of a single unit test needed to re-create the performance of the integration environment would be too involved to be a unit test). Particularly for the first reason stated above, I doubt it makes sense for performance tests to be handled by a unit testing framework (such as NUnit). My question is: do my findings / leanings correspond with the thoughts of the community?

  Read the article

• Animate jquery ui slider handle to specific value

  - by user1159555

  I'm trying to animate a jquery UI handle to a specifiv value. My code is this so far. $("#slider1").slider({ max:350, min:100, animate: 'slow', step:10, animate: "true", value: 0, change: function() { // This setTimeout will allow the slider to animated correctly. setTimeout("$('#slider1').slider('value', 200);", 350); } slide: function(event, ui) { $("#amount").val(ui.value); $(this).find('.ui-slider-handle').html('<div class="sliderControl-label v-labelCurrent">'+ui.value+'</div>'); update(); } }); $('#slider').slider('value', 200); How do I make it so that 1) The handle will go to the specific value on page load and 2) The handle can be freely moved after the page has loaded and the animation has finished. Cheers, Jonah

  Read the article

• jQuery UI autocomplete not working in IE

  - by Peter Di Cecco

  Hi all, I've got the new autocomplete widget in jQuery UI 1.8rc3 working great in Firefox. It doesn't work at all in IE. Can someone help me out? HTML: <input type="text" id="ctrSearch" size="30"> <input type="hidden" id="ctrId"> Javascript: $("#ctrSearch").autocomplete({ source: "ctrSearch.do", minLength: 3, focus: function(event, ui){ $('#ctrSearch').val(ui.item.ctrLastName + ", " + ui.item.ctrFirstName); return false; }, select: function(event, ui){ $('#ctrId').val(ui.item.ctrId); return false; } }); Result (IE 8): The red box is the <ul> element created by jQuery. I also get this error: Line: 116 Error: Invalid argument. When I open it in the IE8 script debugger, it highlights f[b]=d on line 116 of jquery.min.js. Note that I'm using version 1.4.2 of jQuery hosted on Google's servers (https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.4.2/jquery.min.js). I've tried removing some of the options, but even when I call .autocomplete() with no options, or with only the source option, I still get the same result. Once again, it's working in Firefox, but not in IE. Any suggestions? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Drag and drop not working while using JQuery UI dialog

  - by user327854

  Hi Guys ! I m using jquery ui.core.js with version 1.7.2 and jquery-1.4.2.js . I got the issue saying "proto.plugins"(query ui.core.js for draggable module) is undefined ,hence i am not able to perform the drag option.My Code is given below. $("#linkfortag").click(function(){ var $dialog=$("<div id='testing'></div>").dialog({autoOpen:false}); $dialog.dialog("destroy"); $dialog.draggable(); alert("$dialog is" + $dialog.html()); $dialog.dialog('open'); $dialog.dialog({title:'Add Tag',resizable:true,closeOnEscape:true,modal:true,minWidth:250,buttons:{ 'Add Tag':function() { alert($(this).children().children().children(':input').attr('value')); var value=$("#addTag").attr('value'); var formobj=$(this).children(); validate_usertagform(value); } ,'Cancel': function() {$(this).dialog('close');}}}); $dialog.bind("dialogbeforeclose",function(event,ui){ alert("Dialog is gng to close"); alert("<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<UI IS>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>" + ui); }); $dialog.bind("drag",function(event,ui){ alert("<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<drag is>>>>>>>>>>>>>" + event); }); $dialog.dialog( "option", "closeText", '' ); $dialog.dialog("option","draggable",true); }); Please help me on this........

  Read the article

• VS 2010 Coded UI Test - Launch Referenced Application

  - by Cory

  I'm using Visuial Studio's Coded UI Tests to run Automated UI tests on a WPF Application everytime a build runs on my TFS server. The problem I am running into is dynamically launching the executable based on the path where it was just built to, including the configuration(x86, x64). Is there any way to get the path to an executable in a referenced project so that I can launch the application dynamically from my test project?

  Read the article

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