Search Results

Search found 32072 results on 1283 pages for 'catch unit test'.

Page 45/1283 | < Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >

• App Engine Hangout - chat with an App Engine Software Engineer in Test

  App Engine Hangout - chat with an App Engine Software Engineer in Test We'll be chatting with Robert Schuppenies, who is an App Engine Software Engineer in Test. He'll describe a bit about what he does, and talk about/demo some App Engine test frameworks, like the testbed module, code.google.com and code.google.com From: GoogleDevelopers Views: 0 0 ratings Time: 00:00 More in Science & Technology

  Read the article

• Failed to spawn test

  - by Lost

  Running a simple test in Ubuntu 12.04: sudo lxc-execute -n test /bin/bash -l debug -o outout Got error message: lxc-execute: failed to spawn 'test' cat outout: lxc-execute 1347053658.113 DEBUG lxc_start - sigchild handler set lxc-execute 1347053658.113 INFO lxc_start - 'test' is initialized lxc-execute 1347053658.366 DEBUG lxc_start - Dropping cap_sys_boot and watching utmp lxc-execute 1347053658.366 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/' (rootfs) lxc-execute 1347053658.366 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/sys' (sysfs) lxc-execute 1347053658.366 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/proc' (proc) lxc-execute 1347053658.366 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/dev' (devtmpfs) lxc-execute 1347053658.366 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/dev/pts' (devpts) lxc-execute 1347053658.367 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/run' (tmpfs) lxc-execute 1347053658.367 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/' (ext3) lxc-execute 1347053658.367 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/sys/fs/fuse/connections' (fusectl) lxc-execute 1347053658.367 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/sys/kernel/debug' (debugfs) lxc-execute 1347053658.367 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/sys/kernel/security' (securityfs) lxc-execute 1347053658.367 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/run/lock' (tmpfs) lxc-execute 1347053658.367 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/run/shm' (tmpfs) lxc-execute 1347053658.367 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/run/rpc_pipefs' (rpc_pipefs) lxc-execute 1347053658.367 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/scratch/WAMC-Simulation' (nfs) lxc-execute 1347053658.367 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/share' (nfs) lxc-execute 1347053658.367 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/proj/WAMC-Simulation' (nfs) lxc-execute 1347053658.367 DEBUG lxc_cgroup - checking '/users/bhu' (nfs) lxc-execute 1347053658.367 ERROR lxc_start - failed to spawn 'test' Run command: sudo lxc-checkconfig Kernel config /proc/config.gz not found, looking in other places... Found kernel config file /boot/config-2.6.38.7-1.0emulab --- Namespaces --- Namespaces: enabled Utsname namespace: enabled Ipc namespace: enabled Pid namespace: enabled User namespace: enabled Network namespace: enabled Multiple /dev/pts instances: enabled --- Control groups --- Cgroup: enabled Cgroup namespace: enabled Cgroup device: enabled Cgroup sched: enabled Cgroup cpu account: enabled Cgroup memory controller: enabled Cgroup cpuset: enabled --- Misc --- Veth pair device: enabled Macvlan: enabled Vlan: enabled File capabilities: enabled Note : Before booting a new kernel, you can check its configuration usage : CONFIG=/path/to/config /usr/bin/lxc-checkconfig What's the problem? Thanks a lot

  Read the article

• Testcase runner for parametrized testcases

  - by Razer

  Let me explain my situation. I'm planning a kind of test case runner for doing testcases on external devices, which are microcontroller based. Lets consider the devices: Device 1 Device 2 There exist a lot of test cases which can be run with one of the devices above. For example: Testcase 1 Testcase 2 The main reason that all the testcases can be run with any device is, that the testcases validates some standard and this software should be extensible for future devices. The testcases itself must be runnable with changing parameters. For example Testcase 1 does some Timing Verification the testcase needs as input parameter the datarate: 4800, 9600, 19200. Now hoping you understand the situation, let me explain my design questions. For implementing the test cases I thought about an Attribute based approach, like nunit does it. The more complicated problem is, how to define the parametrized testcases? Like this: Device 1: Testcase 1: datarate: 4800, 9600, 19200 Testcase 2: supply: 1, 2, 3 Device 2: Testcase 1: datarate: 9600, 19200, 38400 Testcase 2: supply: 3, 4, 5 How would you design such a framework? I've done a similar desin in python where I had for every device a XML containing the testcase definitions like: <Testcase="Testcase 1" datarate=4800/> <Testcase="Testcase 1" datarate=9600/> <Testcase="Testcase 1" datarate=19200/>

  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

• 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

• At what point would you drop some of your principles of software development for the sake of more money?

  - by MeshMan

  I'd like to throw this question out there to interestingly see where the medium is. I'm going to admit that in my last 12 months, I picked up TDD and a lot of the Agile values in software development. I was so overwhelmed with how much better my development of software became that I would never drop them out of principle. Until...I was offered a contracting role that doubled my take home pay for the year. The company I joined didn't follow any specific methodology, the team hadn't heard of anything like code smells, SOLID, etc., and I certainly wasn't going to get away with spending time doing TDD if the team had never even seen unit testing in practice. Am I a sell out? No, not completely... Code will always been written "cleanly" (as per Uncle Bob's teachings) and the principles of SOLID will always be applied to the code that I write as they are needed. Testing was dropped for me though, the company couldn't afford to have such a unknown handed to the team who quite frankly, even I did create test frameworks, they would never use/maintain the test framework correctly. Using that as an example, what point would you say a developer should never drop his craftsmanship principles for the sake of money/other benefits to them personally? I understand that this can be a very personal opinion on how concerned one is to their own needs, business needs, and the sake of craftsmanship etc. But one can consider that for example testing can be dropped if the company decided they would rather have a test team, than rather understand unit testing in programming, would that be something you could forgive yourself for like I did? So given that there is something you would drop, there usually should be an equal cost in the business that makes up for what you drop - hopefully, unless of course you are pretty much out for lining your own pockets and not community/social collaborating ;). Double your money, go back to RAD? Or walk on, and look for someone doing Agile, and never look back...

  Read the article

• TDD: Write a separate test for object initialization or relying on other tests exercising it

  - by DXM

  This seems to be the common pattern that's emerging in some of the tests I've worked on lately. We have a class, and quite often this is legacy code whose design can't be easily altered, which has a bunch of member variables. There's some kind of "Initialize" or "Load" function which would put an object into a valid state. Only after it is initialized/loaded, are the members in the proper state so that other methods can be exercised. So when we start writing tests, first test is "TestLoad" and all we put in there is exercising initialization logic. Then we might add one (or few) TestLoadFailureXXX tests and those are definitely valuable. Then we start writing tests to verify other behaviors but all of them require the object to be loaded. So they all start by running exactly the same code as "TestLoad". So my question: Is TestLoad even necessary? Do you take it and let other tests simply exercise the loading? Or leave it so things are more explicit? I know that each unit test function should have no (or as little as possible) overlap with other test functions, but it seems like in cases of loading, this is unavoidable. And whether we like it or not, if something in the loading code breaks, we will end up with a whole test suite of failures. Is there another approach that I might be missing here? Thank you for the responses. It definitely makes sense that you want to see "InitializationTest" and if that fails you know where to start looking. In case it matters, this question is mostly about C++ and we use CppUnit framework. And now, thanks to sleske, I'll be constantly wishing that CppUnit supported test dependencies. Might have to hack something in one of these days :)

  Read the article

• How can I write a unit test to determine whether an object can be garbage collected?

  - by driis

  In relation to my previous question, I need to check whether a component that will be instantiated by Castle Windsor, can be garbage collected after my code has finished using it. I have tried the suggestion in the answers from the previous question, but it does not seem to work as expected, at least for my code. So I would like to write a unit test that tests whether a specific object instance can be garbage collected after some of my code has run. Is that possible to do in a reliable way ? EDIT I currently have the following test based on Paul Stovell's answer, which succeeds: [TestMethod] public void ReleaseTest() { WindsorContainer container = new WindsorContainer(); container.Kernel.ReleasePolicy = new NoTrackingReleasePolicy(); container.AddComponentWithLifestyle<ReleaseTester>(LifestyleType.Transient); Assert.AreEqual(0, ReleaseTester.refCount); var weakRef = new WeakReference(container.Resolve<ReleaseTester>()); Assert.AreEqual(1, ReleaseTester.refCount); GC.Collect(); GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers(); Assert.AreEqual(0, ReleaseTester.refCount, "Component not released"); } private class ReleaseTester { public static int refCount = 0; public ReleaseTester() { refCount++; } ~ReleaseTester() { refCount--; } } Am I right assuming that, based on the test above, I can conclude that Windsor will not leak memory when using the NoTrackingReleasePolicy ?

  Read the article

• C# equivalent to VB.NET Catch ... When

  - by fung

  In VB.NET I often Catch ... When ... Try ' Some code' Catch e As ArgumentNullException When e.ParamName.ToUpper() = "SAMPLES" ' Handle the error' End Try Is there a C# equivalent to Catch ... When? I don't want to resort to using an if statement inside a catch if possible.

  Read the article

• Test-Driven Development with plain C: manage multiple modules

  - by Angelo

  I am new to test-driven development, but I'm loving it. There is, however, a main problem that prevents me from using it effectively. I work for embedded medical applications, plain C, with safety issues. Suppose you have module A that has a function A_function() that I want to test. This function call a function B_function, implemented in module B. I want to decouple the module so, as James Grenning teaches, I create a Mock module B that implements a mock version of B_function. However the day comes when I have to implement module B with the real version of B_function. Of course the two B_function can not live in the same executable, so I don't know how to have a unique "launcher" to test both modules. James Grenning way out is to replace, in module A, the call to B_function with a function pointer that can have the value of the mock or the real function according to the need. However I work in a team, and I can not justify this decision that would make no sense if it were not for the test, and no one asked me explicitly to use test-driven approach. Maybe the only way out is to generate different a executable for each module. Any smarter solution? Thank you

  Read the article

• ORACLE UK TECHNOLOGY “TEST FEST”

  - by mseika

  ORACLE UK TECHNOLOGY “TEST FEST” Join us at the UKOUG Conference at the ICC in Birmingham and Take your OPN Implementation Specialist Exam for Free! 3-5 December 2012, ICC Birmingham (UK) Dear Oracle Partner,** As a priority partner, we are sending you advance notice of these exclusive “Technology Test Fest” free examination sessions. Please note that this communication will be sent out to the wider community one week from today, so please register immediately to secure your place! ** We are delighted to offer you the exclusive opportunity to register and attend the Oracle UK “Technology Test Fest” being held as Part of the UKOUG Conference at the ICC in Birmingham in the Drawing Room at the Hyatt Regency hotel adjacent to the ICC venue, from 3rd to 5th December 2012.This is your opportunity to sit your chosen Oracle Technology Specialist Implementation Exam free of charge on this day. Four sessions are being run (10.00AM and 14.00PM), with just 15 places at each session – so register now to avoid disappointment! (Exams take about 1.5 hours to complete.) REGISTER - 3 December Afternoon Session - 2:00pm REGISTER - 4 December Morning Session 10:00am REGISTER - 4 December Afternoon Session - 2:00pm REGISTER - 5 December Morning Session - 10:00am Price: FREE Address:The Drawing Room Hyatt Regency Hotel Birmingham 2 Bridge Street Birmingham BI 2JZ 3 - 5 December 2012 Which Implementation Specialist Exams are available to take?Click here to see the list of exams available for you to sit for free at the Oracle UKOUG “Technology Test Fest”. The links also include the study guide for the particular exam. Please review the Specialization Guide as well. How do I register for the Oracle UK “Technology Test Fest”? Fill out the Pearson Vue profile HERE and complete it with your OPN Company ID. NB: Instructions on how to create/update the profile can be found HERE. Register for one of the 4 sessions using the registration links at the top of this page You will need to bring your own laptop with 'Windows OS' and a form of identification to be able to take any of the exams. Need Help or Advice?For more information about the tests and Get Specialized programme, please contact: [email protected] issues with your profile or any other OPN-related problems, please contact our Oracle Partner Business Centre: [email protected] or call 08705 194 194. We look forward to welcoming you to the Oracle UK “Technology Test Fest” on the 3rd- 5thDecember 2012! Book early to avoid disappointment.

  Read the article

• Test Driven Development Code Order

  - by Bobby Kostadinov

  I am developing my first project using test driven development. I am using Zend Framework and PHPUnit. Currently my project is at 100% code coverage but I am not sure I understand in what order I am supposed to write my code. Am I supposed to write my test FIRST with what my objects are expected to do or write my objects and then test them? Ive been working on completing a controller/model and then writing at test for it but I am not sure this is what TDD is about? Any advice? For example, I wrote my Auth plugin and my Auth controller and tested that they work properly in my browser, and then I sat down to write the tests for them, which proved that there were some logical errors in the code that did work in the browser.

  Read the article

• Why does this asp.net mvc unit test fail?

  - by Brian McCord

  I have this unit test: [TestMethod] public void Delete_Post_Passes_With_State_4() { //Arrange ViewResult result = stateController.Delete( 4 ) as ViewResult; var model = (State)result.ViewData.Model; //Act RedirectToRouteResult redirectResult = stateController.Delete( model ) as RedirectToRouteResult; var newresult = stateController.Delete( 4 ) as ViewResult; var newmodel = (State)newresult.ViewData.Model; //Assert Assert.AreEqual( redirectResult.RouteValues["action"], "Index" ); Assert.IsNull( newmodel ); } Here are the two controller actions that handle deleting: // // GET: /State/Delete/5 public ActionResult Delete(int id) { var x = _stateService.GetById( id ); return View(x); } // // POST: /State/Delete/5 [HttpPost] public ActionResult Delete(State model) { try { if( model == null ) { return View( model ); } _stateService.Delete( model ); return RedirectToAction("Index"); } catch { return View( model ); } } What I can't figure out is why this test fails. I have verified that the record actually gets deleted from the list. If I set a break point in the Delete method on the line: var x = _stateService.GetById( id ); The GetById does indeed return a null just as it should, but when it gets back to the newresult variable in the test, the ViewData.Model is the deleted model. What am I doing wrong?

  Read the article

• What are the best practices for unit testing properties with code in the setter?

  - by nportelli

  I'm fairly new to unit testing and we are actually attempting to use it on a project. There is a property like this. public TimeSpan CountDown { get { return _countDown; } set { long fraction = value.Ticks % 10000000; value -= TimeSpan.FromTicks(fraction); if(fraction > 5000000) value += TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1); if(_countDown != value) { _countDown = value; NotifyChanged("CountDown"); } } } My test looks like this. [TestMethod] public void CountDownTest_GetSet_PropChangedShouldFire() { ManualRafflePresenter target = new ManualRafflePresenter(); bool fired = false; string name = null; target.PropertyChanged += new PropertyChangedEventHandler((o, a) => { fired = true; name = a.PropertyName; }); TimeSpan expected = new TimeSpan(0, 1, 25); TimeSpan actual; target.CountDown = expected; actual = target.CountDown; Assert.AreEqual(expected, actual); Assert.IsTrue(fired); Assert.AreEqual("CountDown", name); } The question is how do I test the code in the setter? Do I break it out into a method? If I do it would probably be private since no one else needs to use this. But they say not to test private methods. Do make a class if this is the only case? would two uses of this code make a class worthwhile? What is wrong with this code from a design standpoint. What is correct?

  Read the article

• Audio is working, but the speaker test doesn't work

  - by Pacquo

  I've installed Ubuntu 12.04 LTS from a minimal cd on a netbook (Asus 1001 PXD). I've installed the ubuntu-desktop package using the --no-install-recommends option. Everything works fine, except the "sound test" for headphones or analog speakers. Clicking on the "test" buttons (front left and front right) I don't hear any sound. Despite this, the audio is working properly. I've checked the audio levels with alsamixer; I have also checked that the test sounds actually exist in /usr/share/sounds/alsa. I tried an installation of Ubuntu 12.04 LTS made with the desktop-cd, and in this case the speaker test works properly. I suppose, therefore, that the problem could depend on the lack of a package, but I have not identified which one.

  Read the article

• Running each JUnit test in a separate JVM in Eclipse?

  - by HenryR

  I have a project with nearly 500 individual tests in around 200 test classes. Some of these tests don't do a great job of tearing down their own state after they're finished, and in Eclipse this results in some tests failing. The tests all pass when running the test suite from the command line via Ant. Can I enable 'test isolation' somehow in Eclipse? I don't mind if it takes longer to run. Long term, I will clean up the misbehaving tests, but in the short term I'd like to get the tests working.

  Read the article

• Django's self.client.login(...) does not work in unit tests

  - by thebossman

  I have created users for my unit tests in two ways: 1) Create a fixture for "auth.user" that looks roughly like this: { "pk": 1, "model": "auth.user", "fields": { "username": "homer", "is_active": 1, "password": "sha1$72cd3$4935449e2cd7efb8b3723fb9958fe3bb100a30f2", ... } } I've left out the seemingly unimportant parts. 2) Use 'create_user' in the setUp function (although I'd rather keep everything in my fixtures class): def setUp(self): User.objects.create_user('homer', '[email protected]', 'simpson') Note that the password is simpson in both cases. I've verified that this info is correctly being loaded into the test database time and time again. I can grab the User object using User.objects.get. I can verify the password is correct using 'check_password.' The user is active. Yet, invariably, self.client.login(username='homer', password='simpson') FAILS. I'm baffled as to why. I think I've read every single Internet discussion pertaining to this. Can anybody help? The login code in my unit test looks like this: login = self.client.login(username='homer', password='simpson') self.assertTrue(login) Thanks.

  Read the article

• How do I test ActionFilterAttributes that work with ModelState?

  - by Tomas Lycken

  As suggested by (among others) Kazi Manzur Rashid in this blog post, I am using ActionFilterAttributes to transfer model state from one request to another when redirecting. However, I find myself unable to write a unit test that test the behavior of these attributes. As an example, this what I want the test for the ImportModelStateAttribute to do: Setup the filterContext so that TempData[myKey] contains some fake "exported" ModelState (that is, a ModelStateDictionary I create myself, and add one error to) Make ModelState contain one model error. Call OnActionExecuting. Verify the two dictionaries are merged, and ModelState now contains both errors. I'm at a loss already on the second step.

  Read the article

• How do I unit test controllers for an asp.net mvc site that uses StructureMap and NHibernate?

  - by Jim Geurts

  I have an asp.net mvc2 application that is using StructureMap 2.6 and NHibernate 3.x. I would like to add unit tests to the application but am sort of at a loss for how to accomplish it. Say I have a basic controller called Posts that has an action called Index. The controller looks something like: public class PostsController : Controller { private readonly IPostService _postService; public PostsController(IPostService postService) { _postService = postService; } public ActionResult Index() { return View(_postService.QueryOver<Post>().Future()); } } If I wanted to create an nunit test that would verify that the index action is returning all of the posts, how do I go about that? If mocking is recommended, do you just assume that interaction with the database will work? Sorry for asking such a broad question, but my web searches haven't turned up anything decent for how to unit test asp.net mvc actions that use StructureMap (or any other IOC) and NHibernate. btw, if you don't like that I return a QueryOver object from my post service, pretend it is an IQueryable object. I'm using it essentially in the same way.

  Read the article

• How doe we name test methods where we are checking for more than one condition?

  - by Sandbox

  I follow the technique specified in Roy Osherove's The Art Of Unit Testing book while naming test methods - MethodName_Scenario_Expectation. It suits perfectly well for my 'unit' tests. But,for tests that I write in 'controller' or 'coordinator' class, there isn't necessarily a method which I want to test. For these tests, I generate multiple conditions which make up one scenario and then I verify the expectation. For example, I may set some properties on different instances, generate an event and then verify that my expectations from controller/coordinator is being met. Now, my controller handles events using a private event handler. Here my scenario is that, I set some properties, say 3 condition1,condition2 and condition3 Also, my scenario includes an event is raised I don't have a method name as my event handler is private. How do I name such a test method?

  Read the article

• How can "today's date" be varied for unit testing purposes?

  - by ck

  I use VS2008 targetting .NET 2.0 Framework, and, just in case, no I can't change this :) I have a DateCalculator class. Its method GetNextExpirationDate attempts to determine the next expiration, internally using DateTime.Today as a baseline date. As I was writing unit tests, I realized that I wanted to test GetNextExpirationDate for different 'today' dates. What's the best way to do this? Here are some alternatives I've considered: Expose a property/overloaded method with argument baselineDate and only use it from the unit test. In actual client code, disregard the property/overloaded method in favour of the method that defaults baselineDate to DateTime.Today. I'm reluctant to do this as it makes the public interface of the DateCalculator class awkward. Create a protected field called baselineDate that is internally set to DateTime.Today. When testing, derive a DateCalculatorForTesting from DateCalculator and set baslineDate via the constructor. It keeps the public interface clean, but still isn't great - baselineDate was made protected and a derived class is required, both solely for testing. Use extension methods. I tried this after adding the ExtensionAttribute, then realized it wouldn't work because extension methods can't access private/protected variables. I initially thought this was really quite an elegant solution. :( I'd be interested in hearing what others think.

  Read the article

• ClassCleanup in MSTest is static, but the build server uses nunit to run the unit tests. How can i a

  - by Kettenbach

  Hi All, MSTest has a [ClassCleanup()] attribute, which needs to be static as far as I can tell. I like to run through after my unit tests have run,and clean up my database. This all works great, however when I go to our build server and use our Nant build script, it seems like the unit tests are run with NUnit. NUnit doesn't seem to like the cleanup method to be static. It therefore ignores my tests in that class. What can I do to remedy this? I prefer to not use [TestCleanUp()] as that is run after each test. Does anyone have any suggestions? I know [TestCleanup()] aids in decoupling, but I really prefer the [ClassCleanup()] in this situation. Here is some example code. ////Use ClassCleanup to run code after all tests have run [ClassCleanup()] public static void MyFacadeTestCleanup() { UpdateCleanup(); } private static void UpdateCleanup() { DbCommand dbCommand; Database db; try { db = DatabaseFactory.CreateDatabase(TestConstants.DB_NAME); int rowsAffected; dbCommand = db.GetSqlStringCommand("DELETE FROM tblA WHERE biID=@biID"); db.AddInParameter(dbCommand, "biID", DbType.Int64, biToDelete); rowsAffected = db.ExecuteNonQuery(dbCommand); Debug.WriteLineIf(rowsAffected == TestConstants.ONE_ROW, string.Format("biId '{0}' was successfully deleted.", biToDelete)); } catch (SqlException ex) { } finally { dbCommand = null; db = null; biDelete = 0; } } Thanks for any pointers and yes i realize I'm not catching anything. I need to get passed this hurdle first. Cheers, ~ck in San Diego

  Read the article

• How to test reliability of my own (small) embedded operating system ?

  - by TridenT

  I've written a small operating system for embedded project running on small to medium target. I added some automated unit test with a high test code coverage (95%), but the scope is only the static part. I got some code metrics as complexity and readability. I'm testing my code with a rule checker with MiSRA support, and of course fixed all warnings. I'm testing the code with a static analyzer and again fixed all warnings. What can I do now to test - and improve - the reliability of my OS ? How about the dynamic part ?

  Read the article

• What's the state of PHP unit testing frameworks in 2010?

  - by Pekka

  As far as I can see, PHPUnit is the only serious product in the field at the moment. It is widely used, is integrated into Continuous Integration suites like phpUnderControl, and well regarded. The thing is, I don't really like working with PHPUnit. I find it hard to set up (PEAR is the only officially supported installation method, and I hate PEAR), sometimes complicated to work with and, correct me if I'm wrong, lacking executability from a web page context (i.e. no CLI, which would really be nice when developing a web app.) The only competition to I can see is Simpletest, which looks very nice but hasn't seen a new release for almost two years, which tends to rule it out for me - Unit Testing is quite a static field, true, but as I will be deploying those tests alongside web applications, I would like to see active development on the project, at least for security updates and such. There is a SO question that pretty much confirms what I'm saying: Simple test vs PHPunit Seeing that that is almost two years old as well, though, I think it's time to ask again: Does anybody know any other serious feature-complete unit testing frameworks? Am I wrong in my criticism of PHPUnit? Is there still development going on for SimpleTest?

  Read the article

• How do we name test methods where we are checking for more than one condition?

  - by Sandbox

  I follow the technique specified in Roy Osherove's The Art Of Unit Testing book while naming test methods - MethodName_Scenario_Expectation. It suits perfectly well for my 'unit' tests. But,for tests that I write in 'controller' or 'coordinator' class, there isn't necessarily a method which I want to test. For these tests, I generate multiple conditions which make up one scenario and then I verify the expectation. For example, I may set some properties on different instances, generate an event and then verify that my expectation from controller/coordinator is being met. Now, my controller handles events using a private event handler. Here my scenario is that, I set some properties, say 3 condition1,condition2 and condition3 Also, my scenario includes an event is raised I don't have a method name as my event handler is private. How do I name such a test method?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >