Search Results

Search found 26978 results on 1080 pages for 'load testing'.

Page 45/1080 | < Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >

  • Framework/tool for processing C++ unit tests with numerical output

    - by David Claridge
    Hi, I am working on a C++ application that uses computer vision techniques to identify various types of objects in a sequence of images. The (1000+) images have been hand-classified, so we have an XML file for each image containing a description of where the objects are actually located in the images. I would like to know if there is a testing framework that can understand/graph results from tests that are numeric, in this case some measure of the error in the program's classification of the images, rather than just pass/fail style unit tests. We would like to use something like CDash/CTest for running these automated tests, and viewing over time how improvements to the vision algorithms are causing the images to be more correctly classified. Does anyone know of a tool/framework that can do this?

    Read the article

  • Unable to locate using find element by link

    - by First Rock
    Newbie in testing. I generated a test case using Selenium, and then exported it as a Python script. Now, when I try to run that in terminal, I get following error: raise exception_class(message, screen, stacktrace) NoSuchElementException: Message: u'Unable to locate element: {"method":"link text","selector":"delete"}' I am using the command generated by Selenium i.e driver.find_element_by_link_text("delete").click() The reason for the error I believe is that the link "delete" in my web page is seen only when I click on a particular line to be deleted. So I guess it is being unable to locate the link. Please suggest what alternative measure could I use to locate and click on the "delete" link. Thanks in Advance:)

    Read the article

  • FREE eBook: .NET Performance Testing and Optimization (Part 1)

    In this this first part of complete guide to performance profiling, Paul Glavich and Chris Farrell explain why performance testing is a good idea and walk you through everything you need to know to set up a test environment. This comprehensive guide to getting started is an essential handbook to any programmer looking to set up a .NET testing environment and get the best results out of it. Download your free copy now span.fullpost {display:none;}

    Read the article

  • When does depth testing happen?

    - by Utkarsh Sinha
    I'm working with 2D sprites - and I want to do 3D style depth testing with them. When writing a pixel shader for them, I get access to the semantic DEPTH0. Would writing to this value help? It seems it doesn't. Maybe it's done before the pixel shader step? Or is depth testing only done when drawing 3D things (I'm using SpriteBatch)? Any links/articles/topics to read/search for would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Workflow Activity Extensions, Activity Packs and Unit Testing Framework

    - by JoshReuben
    http://wf.codeplex.com/ contains a plethora of infrastructure code and new activities for extending Workflow Foundation 4. These are also available as Nuget packages. These include: Activity Extensions Security Activity Pack ADO.NET Activity Pack Azure Activity Pack Activity Unit Testing Framework   view my PowerPoint presentation on these and more here: http://www.slideshare.net/joshuareuben9/workflow-foundation-activity-packs-extensions-and-unit-testing

    Read the article

  • A Skill Testing (Search Engine) Calculation

    - by Ken Cox [MVP]
    To claim a contest prize, I had to answer the following skill-testing question: 1000 - 50 / 2 x 10 Okay, it’s not a problem as long as you know about operator precedence. As a developer, my brain automatically supplied brackets. I was curious as to whether this exact skill-testing question is commonly-used in online contests, so I Googled the formula. To my amazement, Google returned the result of the calculation – complete with brackets: 1 000 - ((50 / 2) x 10) = 750 (Google) Bing also has a calculator...(read more)

    Read the article

  • FREE eBook: .NET Performance Testing and Optimization (Part 1)

    In this this first part of complete guide to performance profiling, Paul Glavich and Chris Farrell explain why performance testing is a good idea and walk you through everything you need to know to set up a test environment. This comprehensive guide to getting started is an essential handbook to any programmer looking to set up a .NET testing environment and get the best results out of it. Download your free copy now span.fullpost {display:none;}

    Read the article

  • PluralSight video on Automated Web Testing with Selenium

    - by TATWORTH
    I am part-way through an excellent video at http://www.pluralsight.com/training/Courses/TableOfContents/selenium on Automated Web Testing with SeleniumSo far everything I have seen leads me to consider that this is an excellent demonstration of Selenium and I recommend to all ASP.NET developers who want to be able to automate testing of their web pages.Selenium is a free tool you can download from http://seleniumhq.org/download/

    Read the article

  • Testing and Validation – You Really Do Have The Time

    - by BuckWoody
    One of the great advantages in my role as a Technical Specialist here at Microsoft is that I get to work with so many great clients. I get to see their environments and how they use them, and the way they work with SQL Server. I’ve been a data professional myself for many years. Over that time I’ve worked with many database platforms, lots of client applications, and written a lot of code in many industries. For a while I was also a consultant, so I got to see how other shops did things as well. But because I now focus on a “set” base of clients (over 500 professionals in over 150 companies) I get to see them over a longer period of time. Many of them help me understand how they use the product in their projects, and I even attend some DBA regular meetings. I see the way the product succeeds, and I see when it fails. Something that has really impacted my way of thinking is the level of importance any given shop is able to place on testing and validation. I’ve always been a big proponent of setting up a test system and following a very disciplined regimen to make sure it will work in production for any new projects, and then taking the lessons learned into production as standards. I know, I know – there’s never enough time to do things right like this. Yet the shops I see that do it have the same level of work that they output as the shops that don’t. They just make the time to do the testing and validation and create a standard that they will follow in production. And what I’ve found (surprise surprise) is that they have fewer production problems. OK, that might seem obvious – but I’ve actually tracked it and those places that do the testing and best practices really do save stress, time and trouble from that effort. We all think that’s a good idea, but we just “don’t have time”. OK – but from what I’m seeing, you can gain time if you spend a little up front. You may find that you’re actually already spending the same amount of time that you would spend in doing the testing, you’re just doing it later, at night, under the gun. Food for thought.  Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • OSB unit testing, part 1 by Qualogy

    - by JuergenKress
    First you need to implement the simple bpel process like this : In my current project, I inherited a lot of OSB components that have been developed by (former) team members, but they all lack unit tests. This is a situation I really dislike, since this makes it much harder to refactor or bug-fix the existing code base. So, for all newly created components (and components I have to bug-fix) I strive to add unit tests. Of course, the unit tests will be created using my favourite testing tool: soapUI ! Unit of test The unit test should be created for the service composition, which in OSB terms should be the proxy service combination with its business service. Now, since you do not want to rely on any other services, you should provide mock services for all services invoked from your Component-Under-Test. In a previous article, I wrote about mocking your services in soapUI. While this approach would also be valid here, creating a mock service (and certainly deploying it on a separate WebServer) does violate one of the core principles of unit testing: to make your unit tests as self-contained as possible, i.e. not depending on any external components. In this article, I will show you how to achieve this by simply providing a mock response inside your unit test. Scenario The scenario I implement for testing is a simple currency converter; the external request consists of a from and a to currency, and an amount (in currency from). The service will perform an exchange rate lookup using the WebServiceX CurrencyConverter and return a response to the caller consisting of both the source and target currencies and amounts. For the purpose of unit testing, I will implement a mock response for the exchange rate lookup. Read the complete article here. SOA & BPM Partner Community For regular information on Oracle SOA Suite become a member in the SOA & BPM Partner Community for registration please visit www.oracle.com/goto/emea/soa (OPN account required) If you need support with your account please contact the Oracle Partner Business Center. Blog Twitter LinkedIn Facebook Wiki Technorati Tags: Qualogy,OSB,SOA Community,Oracle SOA,Oracle BPM,Community,OPN,Jürgen Kress

    Read the article

  • System testing hangs inexplicably

    - by Jamess
    I read that I can upload system testing reports to ubuntu site and was excited with it. But my last three efforts looks like gives me a hung 'system testing' process or it appears so for about an hour each. How I can find out what is happening and if it indeed hung? https://launchpad.net/+login says I am already logged in, but I do not see any progress (or even unable to close the window as well) I am attaching the Screen shot as well:

    Read the article

  • Strangling the life out of Software Testing

    - by MarkPearl
    I recently did a course at the local university on Software Engineering. At the beginning of the course I looked over the outline of the subject and there seemed to be some really good content. It covered traditional & agile project methodologies, some general communication and modelling chapters and finished off with testing. I was particularly excited to see the section on testing as this was something I learnt on my own and see great value in. The course has now just ended and I am very disappointed. I now know one of the reasons why so few people i.e. in my region do Test Driven Development, or perform even basic testing methodologies. The topic was to academic! Yes, you might be able to list 4 different types of black box test approaches vs. white box test approaches and describe the characteristics of Smoke Tests, but never during course did we see an example of an actual test or how it might be implemented! In fact, if I did not have personal experience of applying testing in actual projects, I wouldn’t even know what a unit test looked like. Now, what worries me is the following… It took us 6 months to cover the course material, other students more than likely came out of that course with little appreciation of the subject – in fact they now have a very complex view of what a test is – so complex that I think most of them will never attempt it again on their own. Secondly, imagine studying to be a dentist without ever actually seeing a tooth? Yes, you might be able to describe a tooth, and know what it is made out of – but nobody would want a dentist who has never seen a tooth to operate on them. Yet somehow we expect people studying software engineering to do the same? This is not right. Now, before I finish my rant let me say that I know this is not the same everywhere in the world, and that there needs to be a balance on practical implementation and academic understanding – I am just disappointed that this does not seem to be happening at the institution that I am currently studying at ;-( Please, if you happen to be a lecturer or teacher reading this post – a combination of theory and practical's goes a long way. We need to up the quality of software being produced and that starts at learner level!

    Read the article

  • On The Question Of Automated Website Testing

    Almost all webmasters (or at least "quite a lot of webmasters") have heard about the significance of website testing before the production. Having developed a website or a web application, most authors want to publish it immediately and see how people like it. If they ignore prior website testing, the project may appear unprepared for real Internet activity and reveal awful performance.

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing Myths and Practices

    We all understand the value of Unit Testing, but how come so few organisations maintain unit tests for their in-house applications? We can no longer pretend that unit testing is a universal panacea for ensuring less-buggy applications. Instead, we should be prepared to actively justify the use of unit tests, and be more savvy about where in the development cycle the unit test resources should be most effectively used.

    Read the article

  • Oracle Application Testing Suite 12.1 ??????????

    - by user773457
    Oracle Application Testing Suite 12.1 ??????????? http://japanmediacentre.oracle.com/content/detail.aspx?ReleaseID=1692???????????????? ?JD Edwards EnterpriseOne????????????????????????????????????? ?Oracle Application Testing Suite 12.1????????????????????????(IE9?Linux) ??????????????Oracle Enterprise Manager????????Oracle Cloud???????????????? ???????SQL?????????SELECT???????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????? ???? ATS-Tech ??????????

    Read the article

  • Unit test complex classes with many private methods

    - by Simon G
    Hi, I've got a class with one public method and many private methods which are run depending on what parameter are passed to the public method so my code looks something like: public class SomeComplexClass { IRepository _repository; public SomeComplexClass() this(new Repository()) { } public SomeComplexClass(IRepository repository) { _repository = repository; } public List<int> SomeComplexCalcualation(int option) { var list = new List<int>(); if (option == 1) list = CalculateOptionOne(); else if (option == 2) list = CalculateOptionTwo(); else if (option == 3) list = CalculateOptionThree(); else if (option == 4) list = CalculateOptionFour(); else if (option == 5) list = CalculateOptionFive(); return list; } private List<int> CalculateOptionOne() { // Some calculation } private List<int> CalculateOptionTwo() { // Some calculation } private List<int> CalculateOptionThree() { // Some calculation } private List<int> CalculateOptionFour() { // Some calculation } private List<int> CalculateOptionFive() { // Some calculation } } I've thought of a few ways to test this class but all of them seem overly complex or expose the methods more than I would like. The options so far are: Set all the private methods to internal and use [assembly: InternalsVisibleTo()] Separate out all the private methods into a separate class and create an interface. Make all the methods virtual and in my tests create a new class that inherits from this class and override the methods. Are there any other options for testing the above class that would be better that what I've listed? If you would pick one of the ones I've listed can you explain why? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Writing good tests for Django applications

    - by Ludwik Trammer
    I've never written any tests in my life, but I'd like to start writing tests for my Django projects. I've read some articles about tests and decided to try to write some tests for an extremely simple Django app or a start. The app has two views (a list view, and a detail view) and a model with four fields: class News(models.Model): title = models.CharField(max_length=250) content = models.TextField() pub_date = models.DateTimeField(default=datetime.datetime.now) slug = models.SlugField(unique=True) I would like to show you my tests.py file and ask: Does it make sense? Am I even testing for the right things? Are there best practices I'm not following, and you could point me to? my tests.py (it contains 11 tests): # -*- coding: utf-8 -*- from django.test import TestCase from django.test.client import Client from django.core.urlresolvers import reverse import datetime from someproject.myapp.models import News class viewTest(TestCase): def setUp(self): self.test_title = u'Test title: bareksc' self.test_content = u'This is a content 156' self.test_slug = u'test-title-bareksc' self.test_pub_date = datetime.datetime.today() self.test_item = News.objects.create( title=self.test_title, content=self.test_content, slug=self.test_slug, pub_date=self.test_pub_date, ) client = Client() self.response_detail = client.get(self.test_item.get_absolute_url()) self.response_index = client.get(reverse('the-list-view')) def test_detail_status_code(self): """ HTTP status code for the detail view """ self.failUnlessEqual(self.response_detail.status_code, 200) def test_list_status_code(self): """ HTTP status code for the list view """ self.failUnlessEqual(self.response_index.status_code, 200) def test_list_numer_of_items(self): self.failUnlessEqual(len(self.response_index.context['object_list']), 1) def test_detail_title(self): self.failUnlessEqual(self.response_detail.context['object'].title, self.test_title) def test_list_title(self): self.failUnlessEqual(self.response_index.context['object_list'][0].title, self.test_title) def test_detail_content(self): self.failUnlessEqual(self.response_detail.context['object'].content, self.test_content) def test_list_content(self): self.failUnlessEqual(self.response_index.context['object_list'][0].content, self.test_content) def test_detail_slug(self): self.failUnlessEqual(self.response_detail.context['object'].slug, self.test_slug) def test_list_slug(self): self.failUnlessEqual(self.response_index.context['object_list'][0].slug, self.test_slug) def test_detail_template(self): self.assertContains(self.response_detail, self.test_title) self.assertContains(self.response_detail, self.test_content) def test_list_template(self): self.assertContains(self.response_index, self.test_title)

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • What's the use of writing tests matching configuration-like code line by line?

    - by Pascal Van Hecke
    Hi, I have been wondering about the usefulness of writing tests that match code one-by-one. Just an example: in Rails, you can define 7 restful routes in one line in routes.rb using: resources :products BDD/TDD proscribes you test first and then write code. In order to test the full effect of this line, devs come up with macros e.g. for shoulda: http://kconrails.com/2010/01/27/route-testing-with-shoulda-in-ruby-on-rails/ class RoutingTest < ActionController::TestCase # simple should_map_resources :products end I'm not trying to pick on the guy that wrote the macros, this is just an example of a pattern that I see all over Rails. I'm just wondering what the use of it is... in the end you're just duplicating code and the only thing you test is that Rails works. You could as well write a tool that transforms your test macros into actual code... When I ask around, people answer me that: "the tests should document your code, so yes it makes sense to write them, even if it's just one line corresponding to one line" What are your thoughts?

    Read the article

  • How can I split abstract testcases in JUnit?

    - by Willi Schönborn
    I have an abstract testcase "AbstractATest" for an interface "A". It has several test methods (@Test) and one abstract method: protected abstract A unit(); which provides the unit under testing. No i have multiple implementations of "A", e.g. "DefaultA", "ConcurrentA", etc. My problem: The testcase is huge (~1500 loc) and it's growing. So i wanted to split it into multiple testcases. How can organize/structure this in Junit 4 without the need to have a concrete testcase for every implementation and abstract testcase. I want e.g. "AInitializeTest", "AExectueTest" and "AStopTest". Each being abstract and containing multiple tests. But for my concrete "ConcurrentA", i only want to have one concrete testcase "ConcurrentATest". I hope my "problem" is clear. EDIT Looks like my description was not that clear. Is it possible to pass a reference to a test? I know parameterized tests, but these require static methods, which is not applicable to my setup. Subclasses of an abstract testcase decide about the parameter.

    Read the article

  • Basic WCF Unit Testing

    - by Brian
    Coming from someone who loves the KISS method, I was surprised to find that I was making something entirely too complicated. I know, shocker right? Now I'm no unit testing ninja, and not really a WCF ninja either, but had a desire to test service calls without a) going to a database, or b) making sure that the entire WCF infrastructure was tip top. Who does? It's not the environment I want to test, just the logic I’ve written to ensure there aren't any side effects. So, for the K.I.S.S. method: Assuming that you're using a WCF service library (you are using service libraries correct?), it's really as easy as referencing the service library, then building out some stubs for bunking up data. The service contract We’ll use a very basic service contract, just for getting and updating an entity. I’ve used the default “CompositeType” that is in the template, handy only for examples like this. I’ve added an Id property and overridden ToString and Equals. [ServiceContract] public interface IMyService { [OperationContract] CompositeType GetCompositeType(int id); [OperationContract] CompositeType SaveCompositeType(CompositeType item); [OperationContract] CompositeTypeCollection GetAllCompositeTypes(); } The implementation When I implement the service, I want to be able to send known data into it so I don’t have to fuss around with database access or the like. To do this, I first have to create an interface for my data access: public interface IMyServiceDataManager { CompositeType GetCompositeType(int id); CompositeType SaveCompositeType(CompositeType item); CompositeTypeCollection GetAllCompositeTypes(); } For the purposes of this we can ignore our implementation of the IMyServiceDataManager interface inside of the service. Pretend it uses LINQ to Entities to map its data, or maybe it goes old school and uses EntLib to talk to SQL. Maybe it talks to a tape spool on a mainframe on the third floor. It really doesn’t matter. That’s the point. So here’s what our service looks like in its most basic form: public CompositeType GetCompositeType(int id) { //sanity checks if (id == 0) throw new ArgumentException("id cannot be zero."); return _dataManager.GetCompositeType(id); } public CompositeType SaveCompositeType(CompositeType item) { return _dataManager.SaveCompositeType(item); } public CompositeTypeCollection GetAllCompositeTypes() { return _dataManager.GetAllCompositeTypes(); } But what about the datamanager? The constructor takes care of that. I don’t want to expose any testing ability in release (or the ability for someone to swap out my datamanager) so this is what we get: IMyServiceDataManager _dataManager; public MyService() { _dataManager = new MyServiceDataManager(); } #if DEBUG public MyService(IMyServiceDataManager dataManager) { _dataManager = dataManager; } #endif The Stub Now it’s time for the rubber to meet the road… Like most guys that ever talk about unit testing here’s a sample that is painting in *very* broad strokes. The important part however is that within the test project, I’ve created a bunk (unit testing purists would say stub I believe) object that implements my IMyServiceDataManager so that I can deal with known data. Here it is: internal class FakeMyServiceDataManager : IMyServiceDataManager { internal FakeMyServiceDataManager() { Collection = new CompositeTypeCollection(); Collection.AddRange(new CompositeTypeCollection { new CompositeType { Id = 1, BoolValue = true, StringValue = "foo 1", }, new CompositeType { Id = 2, BoolValue = false, StringValue = "foo 2", }, new CompositeType { Id = 3, BoolValue = true, StringValue = "foo 3", }, }); } CompositeTypeCollection Collection { get; set; } #region IMyServiceDataManager Members public CompositeType GetCompositeType(int id) { if (id <= 0) return null; return Collection.SingleOrDefault(m => m.Id == id); } public CompositeType SaveCompositeType(CompositeType item) { var existing = Collection.SingleOrDefault(m => m.Id == item.Id); if (null != existing) { Collection.Remove(existing); } if (item.Id == 0) { item.Id = Collection.Count > 0 ? Collection.Max(m => m.Id) + 1 : 1; } Collection.Add(item); return item; } public CompositeTypeCollection GetAllCompositeTypes() { return Collection; } #endregion } So it’s tough to see in this example why any of this is necessary, but in a real world application you would/should/could be applying much more logic within your service implementation. This all serves to ensure that between refactorings etc, that it doesn’t send sparking cogs all about or let the blue smoke out. Here’s a simple test that brings it all home, remember, broad strokes: [TestMethod] public void MyService_GetCompositeType_ExpectedValues() { FakeMyServiceDataManager fake = new FakeMyServiceDataManager(); MyService service = new MyService(fake); CompositeType expected = fake.GetCompositeType(1); CompositeType actual = service.GetCompositeType(2); Assert.AreEqual<CompositeType>(expected, actual, "Objects are not equal. Expected: {0}; Actual: {1};", expected, actual); } Summary That’s really all there is to it. You could use software x or framework y to do the exact same thing, but in my case I just didn’t really feel like it. This speaks volumes to my not yet ninja unit testing prowess.

    Read the article

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