Search Results

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

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 46/1283 | < Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >

  • Is it a bad idea to create tests that rely on each other within a test fixture?

    - by nbolton
    For example: // NUnit-like pseudo code (within a TestFixture) Ctor() { m_globalVar = getFoo(); } [Test] Create() { a(m_globalVar) } [Test] Delete() { // depends on Create being run b(m_globalVar) } … or… // NUnit-like pseudo code (within a TestFixture) [Test] CreateAndDelete() { Foo foo = getFoo(); a(foo); // depends on Create being run b(foo); } … I’m going with the later, and assuming that the answer to my question is: No, at least not with NUnit, because according to the NUnit manual: The constructor should not have any side effects, since NUnit may construct the class multiple times in the course of a session. ... also, can I assume it's bad practice in general? Since tests can usually be run separately. So the result of Create may never be cleaned up by Delete.

    Read the article

  • CI tests to enforce specific development rules - good practice?

    - by KeithS
    The following is all purely hypothetical and any particular portion of it may or may not accurately describe real persons or situations, whether living, dead or just pretending. Let's say I'm a senior dev or architect in charge of a dev team working on a project. This project includes a security library for user authentication/authorization of the application under development. The library must be available for developers to edit; however, I wish to "trust but verify" that coders are not doing things that could compromise the security of the finished system, and because this isn't my only responsibility I want it to be done in an automated way. As one example, let's say I have an interface that represents a user which has been authenticated by the system's security library. The interface exposes basic user info and a list of things the user is authorized to do (so that the client app doesn't have to keep asking the server "can I do this?"), all in an immutable fashion of course. There is only one implementation of this interface in production code, and for the purposes of this post we can say that all appropriate measures have been taken to ensure that this implementation can only be used by the one part of our code that needs to be able to create concretions of the interface. The coders have been instructed that this interface and its implementation are sacrosanct and any changes must go through me. However, those are just words; the security library's source is open for editing by necessity. Any of my devs could decide that this secured, private, hash-checked implementation needs to be public so that they could do X, or alternately they could create their own implementation of this public interface in a different library, exposing the hashing algorithm that provides the secure checksum, in order to do Y. I may not be made aware of these changes so that I can beat the developer over the head for it. An attacker could then find these little nuggets in an unobfuscated library of the compiled product, and exploit it to provide fake users and/or falsely-elevated administrative permissions, bypassing the entire security system. This possibility keeps me awake for a couple of nights, and then I create an automated test that reflectively checks the codebase for types deriving from the interface, and fails if it finds any that are not exactly what and where I expect them to be. I compile this test into a project under a separate folder of the VCS that only I have rights to commit to, have CI compile it as an external library of the main project, and set it up to run as part of the CI test suite for user commits. Now, I have an automated test under my complete control that will tell me (and everyone else) if the number of implementations increases without my involvement, or an implementation that I did know about has anything new added or has its modifiers or those of its members changed. I can then investigate further, and regain the opportunity to beat developers over the head as necessary. Is this considered "reasonable" to want to do in situations like this? Am I going to be seen in a negative light for going behind my devs' backs to ensure they aren't doing something they shouldn't?

    Read the article

  • Interpreting and using the Asterisk "timing test" command

    - by zigg
    Timing is very important for certain kinds of applications in Asterisk. If DAHDI is the timing source, the dahdi_test command can be used to check the timing provided by the DAHDI kernel module. If dahdi_test returns exclusively measurements above 99.975%, the DAHDI timing source is generally considered good. Since Asterisk 1.6, new timing sources have become available, such as pthread and timerfd. The accuracy of these timing sources seems to be measurable with the Asterisk CLI timing test command: localhost*CLI> timing test Attempting to test a timer with 50 ticks per second. Using the 'timerfd' timing module for this test. It has been 1000 milliseconds, and we got 50 timer ticks My concern is that timing 50 ticks seems to be a considerably less stressful test than dahdi_test's 8192 samples in 8000 ms, particularly since just about every system I've tried it on, virtual or otherwise, can handle it. I can ask timing test to ramp it up to what I think are dahdi_test's standards: localhost*CLI> timing test 1024 Attempting to test a timer with 1024 ticks per second. Using the 'timerfd' timing module for this test. It has been 1000 milliseconds, and we got 1024 timer ticks This will indeed break down a bit depending on the system I'm using, usually with a decrease in timer ticks. But I'm not sure whether this is useful to stress it to this level. Is there authoritative guidance on using and interpreting the timing test command to insure that a given Asterisk system has a timing source that will work well?

    Read the article

  • Multi-level wildcard (catch-all) DNS setup *.*.domain.com => one IP/CNAME

    - by Jan Rovner
    It is well known that it is possible to configure a DNS server to do a "catch-all" resolving on a single subdomain level, such as *.example.com. IN A x.x.x.x, so that anything.example.com maps to a single IP/CNAME. However, I need to set up an at least "level-2" wildcard sub-subdomain catch-all wildcard system so that any.thing.example.com or better, item.of.any.level.under.example.com will be resolved to a single IP. Has anyone got this working?

    Read the article

  • How to test nginx proxy timeouts

    - by mkorszun
    Target: I would like to test all Nginx proxy timeout parameters in very simple scenario. My first approach was to create really simple HTTP server and put some timeouts: Between listen and accept to test proxy_connect_timeout Between accept and read to test proxy_send_timeout Between read and send to test proxy_read_timeout Test: 1) Server code (python): import socket import os import time import threading def http_resp(conn): conn.send("HTTP/1.1 200 OK\r\n") conn.send("Content-Length: 0\r\n") conn.send("Content-Type: text/xml\r\n\r\n\r\n") def do(conn, addr): print 'Connected by', addr print 'Sleeping before reading data...' time.sleep(0) # Set to test proxy_send_timeout data = conn.recv(1024) print 'Sleeping before sending data...' time.sleep(0) # Set to test proxy_read_timeout http_resp(conn) print 'End of data stream, closing connection' conn.close() def main(): s = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM) s.setsockopt(socket.SOL_SOCKET, socket.SO_REUSEADDR, 1) s.bind(('', int(os.environ['PORT']))) s.listen(1) print 'Sleeping before accept...' time.sleep(130) # Set to test proxy_connect_timeout while 1: conn, addr = s.accept() t = threading.Thread(target=do, args=(conn, addr)) t.start() if __name__ == "__main__": main() 2) Nginx configuration: I have extended Nginx default configuration by setting explicitly proxy_connect_timeout and adding proxy_pass pointing to my local HTTP server: location / { proxy_pass http://localhost:8888; proxy_connect_timeout 200; } 3) Observation: proxy_connect_timeout - Even though setting it to 200s and sleeping only 130s between listen and accept Nginx returns 504 after ~60s which might be because of the default proxy_read_timeout value. I do not understand how proxy_read_timeout could affect connection at so early stage (before accept). I would expect 200 here. Please explain! proxy_send_timeout - I am not sure if my approach to test proxy_send_timeout is correct - i think i still do not understand this parameter correctly. After all, delay between accept and read does not force proxy_send_timeout. proxy_read_timeout - it seems to be pretty straightforward. Setting delay between read and write does the job. So I guess my assumptions are wrong and probably I do not understand proxy_connect and proxy_send timeouts properly. Can some explain them to me using above test if possible (or modifying if required).

    Read the article

  • InvalidProgramException Running Unit Test (Bug Closed)

    - by Anthony Trudeau
    In a previous post I reported an InvalidProgramException that occurs in a certain circumstance with unit tests involving accessors on a private generic method.  It turns out that Bug #635093 reported through Microsoft Connect will not be fixed. The reason cited is that private accessors have been discontinued.  And why have private accessors been discontinued?  They don't have time is the reason listed in the blog post titled "Generation of Private Accessors (Publicize) and Code Generation for Visual Studio 2010". In my opinion, it's a piss poor decision to discontinue support for a feature that they're still using within automatically generated unit tests against private classes and methods.  But, I think what is worse is the lack of guidance cited in the aforementioned blog post.  Their advice?  Use the PrivateObject to help, but develop your own framework. At the end of the day what Microsoft is saying is, "I know you spent a lot of money for this product.  I know that you don't have time to develop a framework to deal with this.  We don't have time and that is all that's important."

    Read the article

  • Unit testing ASP.NET Web API controllers that rely on the UrlHelper

    - by cibrax
    UrlHelper is the class you can use in ASP.NET Web API to automatically infer links from the routing table without hardcoding anything. For example, the following code uses the helper to infer the location url for a new resource,public HttpResponseMessage Post(User model) { var response = Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.Created, user); var link = Url.Link("DefaultApi", new { id = id, controller = "Users" }); response.Headers.Location = new Uri(link); return response; } That code uses a previously defined route “DefaultApi”, which you might configure in the HttpConfiguration object (This is the route generated by default when you create a new Web API project). The problem with UrlHelper is that it requires from some initialization code before you can invoking it from a unit test (for testing the Post method in this example). If you don’t initialize the HttpConfiguration and Request instances associated to the controller from the unit test, it will fail miserably. After digging into the ASP.NET Web API source code a little bit, I could figure out what the requirements for using the UrlHelper are. It relies on the routing table configuration, and a few properties you need to add to the HttpRequestMessage. The following code illustrates what’s needed,var controller = new UserController(); controller.Configuration = new HttpConfiguration(); var route = controller.Configuration.Routes.MapHttpRoute( name: "DefaultApi", routeTemplate: "api/{controller}/{id}", defaults: new { id = RouteParameter.Optional } ); var routeData = new HttpRouteData(route, new HttpRouteValueDictionary { { "id", "1" }, { "controller", "Users" } } ); controller.Request = new HttpRequestMessage(HttpMethod.Post, "http://localhost:9091/"); controller.Request.Properties.Add(HttpPropertyKeys.HttpConfigurationKey, controller.Configuration); controller.Request.Properties.Add(HttpPropertyKeys.HttpRouteDataKey, routeData);  The HttpRouteData instance should be initialized with the route values you will use in the controller method (“id” and “controller” in this example). Once you have correctly setup all those properties, you shouldn’t have any problem to use the UrlHelper. There is no need to mock anything else. Enjoy!!.

    Read the article

  • Benefits of Behavior Driven Development

    - by Aligned
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/Aligned/archive/2013/07/26/benefits-of-behavior-driven-development.aspxContinuing my previous article on BDD, I wanted to point out some benefits of BDD and since BDD is an extension of Test Driven Development (TDD), you get those as well. I’ll add another article on some possible downsides of this approach. There are many articles about the benefits of TDD and they apply to BDD. I’ve pointed out some here and copied some of the main points for each article, but there are many more including the book The Art of Unit Testing by Roy Osherove. http://geekswithblogs.net/leesblog/archive/2008/04/30/the-benefits-of-test-driven-development.aspx (Lee Brandt) Stability Accountability Design Ability Separated Concerns Progress Indicator http://tddftw.com/benefits-of-tdd/ Help maintainers understand the intention behind the code Bring validation and proper data handling concerns to the forefront. Writing the tests first is fun. Better APIs come from writing testable code. TDD will make you a better developer. http://www.slideshare.net/dhelper/benefit-from-unit-testing-in-the-real-world (from Typemock). Take a look at the slides, especially the extra time required for TDD (slide 10) and the next one of the bugs avoided using TDD (slide 11). Less bugs (slide 11) about testing and development (13) Increase confidence in code (14) Fearlessly change your code (14) Document Requirements (14) also see http://visualstudiomagazine.com/articles/2013/06/01/roc-rocks.aspx Discover usability issues early (14) All these points and articles are great and there are many more. The following are my additions to the benefits of BDD from using it in real projects for my company. July 2013 on MSDN - Behavior-Driven Design with SpecFlow Scott Allen did a very informative TDD and MVC module, but to me he is doing BDDCompile and Execute Requirements in Microsoft .NET ~ Video from TechEd 2012 Communication I was working through a complicated task that the decision tree kept growing. After writing out the Given, When, Then of the scenario, I was able tell QA what I had worked through for their initial test cases. They were able to add from there. It is also useful to use this language with other developers, managers, or clients to help make informed decisions on if it meets the requirements or if it can simplified to save time (money). Thinking through solutions, before starting to code This was the biggest benefit to me. I like to jump into coding to figure out the problem. Many times I don't understand my path well enough and have to do some parts over. A past supervisor told me several times during reviews that I need to get better at seeing "the forest for the trees". When I sit down and write out the behavior that I need to implement, I force myself to think things out further and catch scenarios before they get to QA. A co-worker that is new to BDD and we’ve been using it in our new project for the last 6 months, said “It really clarifies things”. It took him awhile to understand it all, but now he’s seeing the value of this approach (yes there are some downsides, but that is a different issue). Developers’ Confidence This is huge for me. With tests in place, my confidence grows that I won’t break code that I’m not directly changing. In the past, I’ve worked on projects with out tests and we would frequently find regression bugs (or worse the users would find them). That isn’t fun. We don’t catch all problems with the tests, but when QA catches one, I can write a test to make sure it doesn’t happen again. It’s also good for Releasing code, telling your manager that it’s good to go. As time goes on and the code gets older, how confident are you that checking in code won’t break something somewhere else? Merging code - pre release confidence If you’re merging code a lot, it’s nice to have the tests to help ensure you didn’t merge incorrectly. Interrupted work I had a task that I started and planned out, then was interrupted for a month because of different priorities. When I started it up again, and un-shelved my changes, I had the BDD specs and it helped me remember what I had figured out and what was left to do. It would have much more difficult without the specs and tests. Testing and verifying complicated scenarios Sometimes in the UI there are scenarios that get tricky, because there are a lot of steps involved (click here to open the dialog, enter the information, make sure it’s valid, when I click cancel it should do {x}, when I click ok it should close and do {y}, then do this, etc….). With BDD I can avoid some of the mouse clicking define the scenarios and have them re-run quickly, without using a mouse. UI testing is still needed, but this helps a bunch. The same can be true for tricky server logic. Documentation of Assumptions and Specifications The BDD spec tests (Jasmine or SpecFlow or other tool) also work as documentation and show what the original developer was trying to accomplish. It’s not a different Word document, so developers will keep this up to date, instead of letting it become obsolete. What happens if you leave the project (consulting, new job, etc) with no specs or at the least good comments in the code? Sometimes I think of a new scenario, so I add a failing spec and continue in the same stream of thought (don’t forget it because it was on a piece of paper or in a notepad). Then later I can come back and handle it and have it documented. Jasmine tests and JavaScript –> help deal with the non-typed system I like JavaScript, but I also dislike working with JavaScript. I miss C# telling me if a property doesn’t actually exist at build time. I like the idea of TypeScript and hope to use it more in the future. I also use KnockoutJs, which has observables that need to be called with ending (), since the observable is a function. It’s hard to remember when to use () or not and the Jasmine specs/tests help ensure the correct usage.   This should give you an idea of the benefits that I see in using the BDD approach. I’m sure there are more. It talks a lot of practice, investment and experimentation to figure out how to approach this and to get comfortable with it. I agree with Scott Allen in the video I linked above “Remember that TDD can take some practice. So if you're not doing test-driven design right now? You can start and practice and get better. And you'll reach a point where you'll never want to get back.”

    Read the article

  • Need help understanding Mocks and Stubs

    - by Theomax
    I'm new to use mocking frameworks and I have a few questions on the things that I am not clear on. I'm using Rhinomocks to generate mock objects in my unit tests. I understand that mocks can be created to verify interactions between methods and they record the interactions etc and stubs allow you to setup data and entities required by the test but you do not verify expectations on stubs. Looking at the recent unit tests I have created, I appear to be creating mocks literally for the purpose of stubbing and allowing for data to be setup. Is this a correct usage of mocks or is it incorrect if you're not actually calling verify on them? For example: user = MockRepository.GenerateMock<User>(); user.Stub(x => x.Id = Guid.NewGuid()); user.Stub(x => x.Name = "User1"); In the above code I generate a new user mock object, but I use a mock so I can stub the properties of the user because in some cases if the properties do not have a setter and I need to set them it seems the only way is to stub the property values. Is this a correct usage of stubbing and mocking? Also, I am not completely clear on what the difference between the following lines is: user.Stub(x => x.Id).Return(new Guid()); user.Stub(x => x.Id = Guid.NewGuid());

    Read the article

  • Classes as a compilation unit

    - by Yannbane
    If "compilation unit" is unclear, please refer to this. However, what I mean by it will be clear from the context. Edit: my language allows for multiple inheritance, unlike Java. I've started designing+developing my own programming language for educational, recreational, and potentially useful purposes. At first, I've decided to base it off Java. This implied that I would have all the code be written inside classes, and that code compiles to classes, which are loaded by the VM. However, I've excluded features such as interfaces and abstract classes, because I found no need for them. They seemed to be enforcing a paradigm, and I'd like my language not to do that. I wanted to keep the classes as the compilation unit though, because it seemed convenient to implement, familiar, and I just liked the idea. Then I noticed that I'm basically left with a glorified module system, where classes could be used either as "namespaces", providing constants and functions using the static directive, or as templates for objects that need to be instantiated ("actual" purpose of classes in other languages). Now I'm left wondering: what are the benefits of having classes as compilation units? (Also, any general commentary on my design would be much appreciated.)

    Read the article

  • How do i assert my exception message with JUNIT Test annotation ?

    - by Cshah
    i have written a few junits with @Test annotation. If my test method throws a checked exception and if i want to assert the message along with the exception, is there a way to do so with JUNIT @Test annotation.AFAIK, Junit 4.7 doesnt provide this feature but does any future versions provide it. I know in .NET you can assert the message and the exception class. Looking for similar feature in the java world. This is what i want @Test (expected = RuntimeException.class, message = "Employee ID is null") public void shouldThrowRuntimeExceptionWhenEmployeeIDisNull() { }

    Read the article

  • Junit run not picking file src/test/resources. For file required by some dependency jar

    - by saddy-dj
    Hi, I m facing a issue where test/resource is not picked,but instead jar's main/resource is picked Scenario is like : Myproject src/test/resources--- have config.xml w which should be needed by abc.jar which is a dependecy in Myproject. When running test case for Myproject its loading config.xml of abc.jar instead of Myproject test/resources. - I need to know order in which maven pick resources. - Or wat im trying is not possible. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Can't add client machine to windows server 2008 domain controller

    - by Patrick J Collins
    A bit of background before I dive into the gritty details: I have a single server running Windows 2003 Server where I host my ASP.net website and SQL Server + Reports. I've been creating ordinary windows user accounts to authenticate my users, and I enabled integrated windows authentication with impersonation. I've set up a bunch of user groups which correspond to certain roles (admin, power user, normal user, etc) and I test membership to enable or disable certain features. Overall, I'm pretty happy with the solution, it was quick to setup and I don't have to worry about messing around storing passwords and whatnot. Well, what I'm trying to do now is set up a new environment with 3 servers (Web, SQL, Reports) and I'd like these three servers to share common user accounts. I understand that I could add these three machines to a domain, which means installing Active Directory on one of the machines. I am barking up the wrong tree here? Would you suggest an alternative configuration? Assuming that I stick with AD, I have a couple of questions regarding DNS. To be honest, I'd rather not fiddle around with the DNS settings because my ISP already has their own DNS server which works just fine. It would appear however that DNS and AD are intertwined. Firstly, if I am to create a new domain in called mycompany.net, do I actually need to be the registered owner of that domain name and ensure the DNS entry points to the IP address of the machine hosting AD? Secondly, for the two other machines that I am trying to add to the domain, do I need to fiddle with their DNS settings? I've tried setting the preferred DNS Server IP address to that of my newly installed AD, but no luck. At this point, I can't add the two other machines to the domain. Here are some diagnostics that I have run based on a few suggestions I read on forums (sorry they're in French, although I could translate if needed). I ran nltest, which seems to indicate that the client can discover the domain controller. When I run dcdiag, the call to DsGetDcName fails with error 1722, not really sure what that means. Any suggestions? Thanks! C:\Users\Administrator>nltest /dsgetdc:mycompany.net Contrôleur de domaine : \\REPORTS.mycompany.net Adresse : \\111.111.111.111 GUID dom : 3333a4ec-ca56-4f02-bb9e-76c29c6c3832 Nom dom : mycompany.net Nom de la forêt : mycompany.net Nom de site du contrôleur de domaine : Default-First-Site-Name Nom de notre site : Default-First-Site-Name Indicateurs : PDC GC DS LDAP KDC TIMESERV WRITABLE DNS_DC DNS_DOMAIN DNS _FOREST CLOSE_SITE FULL_SECRET La commande a été correctement exécutée C:\Users\Administrator>dcdiag /s:mycompany.net /u: mycompany.net \pcollins /p:somepass Diagnostic du serveur d'annuaire Exécution de l'installation initiale : * Forêt AD identifiée. Collecte des informations initiales terminée. Exécution des tests initiaux nécessaires Test du serveur : Default-First-Site-Name\REPORTS Démarrage du test : Connectivity ......................... Le test Connectivity de REPORTS a réussi Exécution des tests principaux Test du serveur : Default-First-Site-Name\REPORTS Démarrage du test : Advertising Erreur irrécupérable : l'appel DsGetDcName (REPORTS) a échoué ; erreur 1722 Le localisateur n'a pas pu trouver le serveur. ......................... Le test Advertising de REPORTS a échoué Démarrage du test : FrsEvent Impossible d'interroger le journal des événements File Replication Service sur le serveur REPORTS.mycompany.net. Erreur 0x6ba « Le serveur RPC n'est pas disponible. » ......................... Le test FrsEvent de REPORTS a échoué Démarrage du test : DFSREvent Impossible d'interroger le journal des événements DFS Replication sur le serveur REPORTS.mycompany.net. Erreur 0x6ba « Le serveur RPC n'est pas disponible. » ......................... Le test DFSREvent de REPORTS a échoué Démarrage du test : SysVolCheck [REPORTS] Une opération net use ou LsaPolicy a échoué avec l'erreur 53, Le chemin réseau n'a pas été trouvé.. ......................... Le test SysVolCheck de REPORTS a échoué Démarrage du test : KccEvent Impossible d'interroger le journal des événements Directory Service sur le serveur REPORTS.mycompany.net. Erreur 0x6ba « Le serveur RPC n'est pas disponible. » ......................... Le test KccEvent de REPORTS a échoué Démarrage du test : KnowsOfRoleHolders ......................... Le test KnowsOfRoleHolders de REPORTS a réussi Démarrage du test : MachineAccount Impossible d'ouvrir le canal avec [REPORTS] : échec avec l'erreur 53 : Le chemin réseau n'a pas été trouvé. Impossible d'obtenir le nom de domaine NetBIOS Échec : impossible de tester le nom principal de service (SPN) HOST Échec : impossible de tester le nom principal de service (SPN) HOST ......................... Le test MachineAccount de REPORTS a réussi Démarrage du test : NCSecDesc ......................... Le test NCSecDesc de REPORTS a réussi Démarrage du test : NetLogons [REPORTS] Une opération net use ou LsaPolicy a échoué avec l'erreur 53, Le chemin réseau n'a pas été trouvé.. ......................... Le test NetLogons de REPORTS a échoué Démarrage du test : ObjectsReplicated ......................... Le test ObjectsReplicated de REPORTS a réussi Démarrage du test : Replications ......................... Le test Replications de REPORTS a réussi Démarrage du test : RidManager ......................... Le test RidManager de REPORTS a réussi Démarrage du test : Services Impossible d'ouvrir IPC distant à [REPORTS.mycompany.net] : erreur 0x35 « Le chemin réseau n'a pas été trouvé. » ......................... Le test Services de REPORTS a échoué Démarrage du test : SystemLog Impossible d'interroger le journal des événements System sur le serveur REPORTS.mycompany.net. Erreur 0x6ba « Le serveur RPC n'est pas disponible. » ......................... Le test SystemLog de REPORTS a échoué Démarrage du test : VerifyReferences ......................... Le test VerifyReferences de REPORTS a réussi Exécution de tests de partitions sur ForestDnsZones Démarrage du test : CheckSDRefDom ......................... Le test CheckSDRefDom de ForestDnsZones a réussi Démarrage du test : CrossRefValidation ......................... Le test CrossRefValidation de ForestDnsZones a réussi Exécution de tests de partitions sur DomainDnsZones Démarrage du test : CheckSDRefDom ......................... Le test CheckSDRefDom de DomainDnsZones a réussi Démarrage du test : CrossRefValidation ......................... Le test CrossRefValidation de DomainDnsZones a réussi Exécution de tests de partitions sur Schema Démarrage du test : CheckSDRefDom ......................... Le test CheckSDRefDom de Schema a réussi Démarrage du test : CrossRefValidation ......................... Le test CrossRefValidation de Schema a réussi Exécution de tests de partitions sur Configuration Démarrage du test : CheckSDRefDom ......................... Le test CheckSDRefDom de Configuration a réussi Démarrage du test : CrossRefValidation ......................... Le test CrossRefValidation de Configuration a réussi Exécution de tests de partitions sur mycompany Démarrage du test : CheckSDRefDom ......................... Le test CheckSDRefDom de mycompany a réussi Démarrage du test : CrossRefValidation ......................... Le test CrossRefValidation de mycompany a réussi Exécution de tests d'entreprise sur mycompany.net Démarrage du test : LocatorCheck Avertissement : l'appel DcGetDcName(GC_SERVER_REQUIRED) a échoué ; erreur 1722 Serveur de catalogue global introuvable - Les catalogues globaux ne fonctionnent pas. Avertissement : l'appel DcGetDcName(PDC_REQUIRED) a échoué ; erreur 1722 Contrôleur principal de domaine introuvable. Le serveur contenant le rôle PDC ne fonctionne pas. Avertissement : l'appel DcGetDcName(TIME_SERVER) a échoué ; erreur 1722 Serveur de temps introuvable. Le serveur contenant le rôle PDC ne fonctionne pas. Avertissement : l'appel DcGetDcName(GOOD_TIME_SERVER_PREFERRED) a échoué ; erreur 1722 Serveur de temps introuvable. Avertissement : l'appel DcGetDcName(KDC_REQUIRED) a échoué ; erreur 1722 Centre de distribution de clés introuvable : les centres de distribution de clés ne fonctionnent pas. ......................... Le test LocatorCheck de mycompany.net a échoué Démarrage du test : Intersite ......................... Le test Intersite de mycompany.net a réussi Update 1 : I am under the distinct impression that the problem is caused by some security settings. I have read elsewhere that the client needs to be able to access the fileshare sysvol. I had to enable Client for Microsoft Windows and File and Printer Sharing which were previously disabled. When I now run dcdiag the Advertising test works, which I suppose is forward progress. It currently chokes on the Services step (unable to open remote IPC). Démarrage du test : Services Impossible d'ouvrir IPC distant à [REPORTS.locbus.net] : erreur 0x35 « Le chemin réseau n'a pas été trouvé. » ......................... Le test Services de REPORTS a échoué The original English version of that error message : Could not open Remote ipc to [server] Update 2 : I attach some more diagnostics : Netsetup.log (client): 09/24/2009 13:27:09:773 ----------------------------------------------------------------- 09/24/2009 13:27:09:773 NetpValidateName: checking to see if 'WEB' is valid as type 1 name 09/24/2009 13:27:12:773 NetpCheckNetBiosNameNotInUse for 'WEB' [MACHINE] returned 0x0 09/24/2009 13:27:12:773 NetpValidateName: name 'WEB' is valid for type 1 09/24/2009 13:27:12:805 ----------------------------------------------------------------- 09/24/2009 13:27:12:805 NetpValidateName: checking to see if 'WEB' is valid as type 5 name 09/24/2009 13:27:12:805 NetpValidateName: name 'WEB' is valid for type 5 09/24/2009 13:27:12:852 ----------------------------------------------------------------- 09/24/2009 13:27:12:852 NetpValidateName: checking to see if 'MYCOMPANY.NET' is valid as type 3 name 09/24/2009 13:27:12:992 NetpCheckDomainNameIsValid [ Exists ] for 'MYCOMPANY.NET' returned 0x0 09/24/2009 13:27:12:992 NetpValidateName: name 'MYCOMPANY.NET' is valid for type 3 09/24/2009 13:27:21:320 ----------------------------------------------------------------- 09/24/2009 13:27:21:320 NetpDoDomainJoin 09/24/2009 13:27:21:320 NetpMachineValidToJoin: 'WEB' 09/24/2009 13:27:21:320 OS Version: 6.0 09/24/2009 13:27:21:320 Build number: 6002 09/24/2009 13:27:21:320 ServicePack: Service Pack 2 09/24/2009 13:27:21:414 SKU: Windows Server® 2008 Standard 09/24/2009 13:27:21:414 NetpDomainJoinLicensingCheck: ulLicenseValue=1, Status: 0x0 09/24/2009 13:27:21:414 NetpGetLsaPrimaryDomain: status: 0x0 09/24/2009 13:27:21:414 NetpMachineValidToJoin: status: 0x0 09/24/2009 13:27:21:414 NetpJoinDomain 09/24/2009 13:27:21:414 Machine: WEB 09/24/2009 13:27:21:414 Domain: MYCOMPANY.NET 09/24/2009 13:27:21:414 MachineAccountOU: (NULL) 09/24/2009 13:27:21:414 Account: MYCOMPANY.NET\pcollins 09/24/2009 13:27:21:414 Options: 0x25 09/24/2009 13:27:21:414 NetpLoadParameters: loading registry parameters... 09/24/2009 13:27:21:414 NetpLoadParameters: DNSNameResolutionRequired not found, defaulting to '1' 0x2 09/24/2009 13:27:21:414 NetpLoadParameters: status: 0x2 09/24/2009 13:27:21:414 NetpValidateName: checking to see if 'MYCOMPANY.NET' is valid as type 3 name 09/24/2009 13:27:21:523 NetpCheckDomainNameIsValid [ Exists ] for 'MYCOMPANY.NET' returned 0x0 09/24/2009 13:27:21:523 NetpValidateName: name 'MYCOMPANY.NET' is valid for type 3 09/24/2009 13:27:21:523 NetpDsGetDcName: trying to find DC in domain 'MYCOMPANY.NET', flags: 0x40001010 09/24/2009 13:27:22:039 NetpDsGetDcName: failed to find a DC having account 'WEB$': 0x525, last error is 0x79 09/24/2009 13:27:22:039 NetpDsGetDcName: status of verifying DNS A record name resolution for 'KING.MYCOMPANY.NET': 0x0 09/24/2009 13:27:22:039 NetpDsGetDcName: found DC '\\KING.MYCOMPANY.NET' in the specified domain 09/24/2009 13:27:30:039 NetUseAdd to \\KING.MYCOMPANY.NET\IPC$ returned 53 09/24/2009 13:27:30:039 NetpJoinDomain: status of connecting to dc '\\KING.MYCOMPANY.NET': 0x35 09/24/2009 13:27:30:039 NetpDoDomainJoin: status: 0x35 09/24/2009 13:27:30:148 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ipconfig /all (on client): Configuration IP de Windows Nom de l'hôte . . . . . . . . . . : WEB Suffixe DNS principal . . . . . . : Type de noeud. . . . . . . . . . : Hybride Routage IP activé . . . . . . . . : Non Proxy WINS activé . . . . . . . . : Non Carte Ethernet Connexion au réseau local : Suffixe DNS propre à la connexion. . . : Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel 21140-Based PCI Fast Ethernet Adapter (Emulated) Adresse physique . . . . . . . . . . . : **-15-5D-A1-17-** DHCP activé. . . . . . . . . . . . . . : Non Configuration automatique activée. . . : Oui Adresse IPv4. . . . . . . . . . . : **.***.163.122(préféré) Masque de sous-réseau. . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Passerelle par défaut. . . . . . . . . : **.***.163.2 Serveurs DNS. . . . . . . . . . . . . : **.***.163.123 NetBIOS sur Tcpip. . . . . . . . . . . : Activé ipconfig /all (on server): Configuration IP de Windows Nom de l'hôte . . . . . . . . . . : KING Suffixe DNS principal . . . . . . : mycompany.net Type de noeud. . . . . . . . . . : Hybride Routage IP activé . . . . . . . . : Non Proxy WINS activé . . . . . . . . : Non Liste de recherche du suffixe DNS.: locbus.net Carte Ethernet Connexion au réseau local : Suffixe DNS propre à la connexion. . . : Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel 21140-Based PCI Fast Ethernet Adapter (Emulated) Adresse physique . . . . . . . . . . . : **-15-5D-A1-1E-** DHCP activé. . . . . . . . . . . . . . : Non Configuration automatique activée. . . : Oui Adresse IPv4. . . . . . . . . . . : **.***.163.123(préféré) Masque de sous-réseau. . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Passerelle par défaut. . . . . . . . . : **.***.163.2 Serveurs DNS. . . . . . . . . . . . . : 127.0.0.1 NetBIOS sur Tcpip. . . . . . . . . . . : Activé nslookup (on client): Serveur : *******.***.com Address: **.***.163.123 Nom : mycompany.net Addresses: ****:****:a37b::****:a37b **.****.163.123

    Read the article

  • Parsing C#, finding methods and putting try/catch to all methods

    - by erdogany
    I know it sounds weird but I am required to put a wrapping try catch block to every method to catch all exceptions. We have thousands of methods and I need to do it in an automated way. What do you suggest? I am planning to parse all cs files and detect methods and insert a try catch block with an application. Can you suggest me any parser that I can easily use? or anything that will help me... every method has its unique number like 5006 public static LogEntry Authenticate(....) { LogEntry logEntry = null; try { .... return logEntry; } catch (CompanyException) { throw; } catch (Exception ex) { logEntry = new LogEntry( "5006", RC.GetString("5006"), EventLogEntryType.Error, LogEntryCategory.Foo); throw new CompanyException(logEntry, ex); } } I created this for this; http://thinkoutofthenet.com/index.php/2009/01/12/batch-code-method-manipulation/

    Read the article

  • How can a test script inform R CMD check that it should emit a custom message?

    - by mariotomo
    I'm writing a R package (delftfews) here at office. we are using svUnit for unit testing. our process for describing new functionality: we define new unit tests, initially marked as DEACTIVATED; one block of tests at a time we activate them and implement the function described by the tests. almost all the time we have a small amount of DEACTIVATED tests, relative to functions that might be dropped or will be implemented. my problem/question is: can I alter the doSvUnit.R so that R CMD check pkg emits a NOTE (i.e. a custom message "NOTE" instead of "OK") in case there are DEACTIVATED tests? as of now, we see only that the active tests don't give error: . . * checking for unstated dependencies in tests ... OK * checking tests ... Running ‘doSvUnit.R’ OK * checking PDF version of manual ... OK which is all right if all tests succeed, but less all right if there are skipped tests and definitely wrong if there are failing tests. In this case, I'd actually like to see a NOTE or a WARNING like the following: . . * checking for unstated dependencies in tests ... OK * checking tests ... Running ‘doSvUnit.R’ NOTE 6 test(s) were skipped. WARNING 1 test(s) are failing. * checking PDF version of manual ... OK As of now, we have to open the doSvUnit.Rout to check the real test results. I contacted two of the maintainers at r-forge and CRAN and they pointed me to the sources of R, in particular the testing.R script. if I understand it correctly, to answer this question we need patching the tools package: scripts in the tests directory are called using a system call, output (stdout and stderr) go to one single file, there are two possible outcomes: ok or not ok, so I opened a change request on R, proposing something like bit-coding the return status, bit-0 for ERROR (as it is now), bit-1 for WARNING, bit-2 for NOTE. with my modification, it would be easy producing this output: . . * checking for unstated dependencies in tests ... OK * checking tests ... Running ‘doSvUnit.R’ NOTE - please check doSvUnit.Rout. WARNING - please check doSvUnit.Rout. * checking PDF version of manual ... OK Brian Ripley replied "There are however several packages with properly written unit tests that do signal as required. Please do take this discussion elsewhere: R-bugs is not the place to ask questions." and closed the change request. anybody has hints?

    Read the article

  • How to unit test internals (organization) of a data structure?

    - by Herms
    I've started working on a little ruby project that will have sample implementations of a number of different data structures and algorithms. Right now it's just for me to refresh on stuff I haven't done for a while, but I'm hoping to have it set up kind of like Ruby Koans, with a bunch of unit tests written for the data structures but the implementations empty (with full implementations in another branch). It could then be used as a nice learning tool or code kata. However, I'm having trouble coming up with a good way to write the tests. I can't just test the public behavior as that won't necessarily tell me about the implementation, and that's kind of important here. For example, the public interfaces of a normal BST and a Red-Black tree would be the same, but the RB Tree has very specific data organization requirements. How would I test that?

    Read the article

  • What is the best approach to write test cases using sentestinkit in iPhone / iPad ?

    - by Madhup
    I am developing an application for iPad application. I need to perform unit testing in the application, but I am not sure why I should do unit testing in this application. Edit: And since the iPhone SenTestingKit is not well documented, the implementation and writing test cases is so time consuming. So why should we waste time with this? Also if we have to what would be the best approach to write the test cases? My focus is on the second question. So please answer more for the second part, I would be very pleased.

    Read the article

  • What's the best way to unit test code that generates random output?

    - by Flynn1179
    Specifically, I've got a method picks n items from a list in such a way that a% of them meet one criterion, and b% meet a second, and so on. A simplified example would be to pick 5 items where 50% have a given property with the value 'true', and 50% 'false'; 50% of the time the method would return 2 true/3 false, and the other 50%, 3 true/2 false. Statistically speaking, this means that over 100 runs, I should get about 250 true/250 false, but because of the randomness, 240/260 is entirely possible. What's the best way to unit test this? I'm assuming that even though technically 300/200 is possible, it should probably fail the test if this happens. Is there a generally accepted tolerance for cases like this, and if so, how do you determine what that is?

    Read the article

  • "input cannot be resolved" when added a try..catch

    - by Mark
    I originally tried to get my throw statement to work without a try catch and the userInput = input.nextInt(); line worked fine. But when I tried adding the try..catch it didn't like my input saying it cannot be resolved. I don't think my try..catch is correct yet but I am planning on tackling that after I can get this input to be recognized but I would appreciate any feedback on things you see with that as well. Thanks import java.util.Scanner; public class Program6 { public static void main(String[] args) { final int NUMBER_HIGH_LIMIT = 100; final int NUMBER_LOW_LIMIT = 10; int userInput; try { System.out.print("Enter a number between 10 and 100: "); userInput = input.nextInt();//Says input cannot be resolved Verify v = new Verify(NUMBER_HIGH_LIMIT, NUMBER_LOW_LIMIT); } catch(NumberHighException exception) { userInput = 0; } catch(NumberLowException exception) { userInput = 0; } } }

    Read the article

  • C# Unit Testing: How do I set a Lazy<T>.ValueCreated to false?

    - by michael paul
    Basically, I have a unit test that gets a singleton instance of a class. Some of my tests required me to mock this singleton, so when I do Foo.Instance I get a different type of instance. The problem is that my checks are passing individually, but failing overall because one test is interfering with another. I tried to do a TestCleanup where I set: Foo_Accessor._instance = null; but that didn't work. What I really need is Foo_Accessor._instance.IsValueCreated = false; (_instance is a Lazy). Any way to unset the Lazy object that I didn't think of?

    Read the article

  • Introducing Typemock Test Lint

    We just released a new, free product -  Typemock Test Lint, click here for all the gory details. Its a just-in-time unit testing coach that looks at your code as you type and looks for common unit testing errors. Or, you can just watch this movie: ...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • Subterranean IL: Compiling C# exception handlers

    - by Simon Cooper
    An exception handler in C# combines the IL catch and finally exception handling clauses into a single try statement: try { Console.WriteLine("Try block") // ... } catch (IOException) { Console.WriteLine("IOException catch") // ... } catch (Exception e) { Console.WriteLine("Exception catch") // ... } finally { Console.WriteLine("Finally block") // ... } How does this get compiled into IL? Initial implementation If you remember from my earlier post, finally clauses must be specified with their own .try clause. So, for the initial implementation, we take the try/catch/finally, and simply split it up into two .try clauses (I have to use label syntax for this): StartTry: ldstr "Try block" call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) // ... leave.s End EndTry: StartIOECatch: ldstr "IOException catch" call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) // ... leave.s End EndIOECatch: StartECatch: ldstr "Exception catch" call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) // ... leave.s End EndECatch: StartFinally: ldstr "Finally block" call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) // ... endfinally EndFinally: End: // ... .try StartTry to EndTry catch [mscorlib]System.IO.IOException handler StartIOECatch to EndIOECatch catch [mscorlib]System.Exception handler StartECatch to EndECatch .try StartTry to EndTry finally handler StartFinally to EndFinally However, the resulting program isn't verifiable, and doesn't run: [IL]: Error: Shared try has finally or fault handler. Nested try blocks What's with the verification error? Well, it's a condition of IL verification that all exception handling regions (try, catch, filter, finally, fault) of a single .try clause have to be completely contained within any outer exception region, and they can't overlap with any other exception handling clause. In other words, IL exception handling clauses must to be representable in the scoped syntax, and in this example, we're overlapping catch and finally clauses. Not only is this example not verifiable, it isn't semantically correct. The finally handler is specified round the .try. What happens if you were able to run this code, and an exception was thrown? Program execution enters top of try block, and exception is thrown within it CLR searches for an exception handler, finds catch Because control flow is leaving .try, finally block is run The catch block is run leave.s End inside the catch handler branches to End label. We're actually running the finally before the catch! What we do about it What we actually need to do is put the catch clauses inside the finally clause, as this will ensure the finally gets executed at the correct time (this time using scoped syntax): .try { .try { ldstr "Try block" call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) // ... leave.s End } catch [mscorlib]System.IO.IOException { ldstr "IOException catch" call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) // ... leave.s End } catch [mscorlib]System.Exception { ldstr "Exception catch" call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) // ... leave.s End } } finally { ldstr "Finally block" call void [mscorlib]System.Console::WriteLine(string) // ... endfinally } End: ret Returning from methods There is a further semantic mismatch that the C# compiler has to deal with; in C#, you are allowed to return from within an exception handling block: public int HandleMethod() { try { // ... return 0; } catch (Exception) { // ... return -1; } } However, you can't ret inside an exception handling block in IL. So the C# compiler does a leave.s to a ret outside the exception handling area, loading/storing any return value to a local variable along the way (as leave.s clears the stack): .method public instance int32 HandleMethod() { .locals init ( int32 retVal ) .try { // ... ldc.i4.0 stloc.0 leave.s End } catch [mscorlib]System.Exception { // ... ldc.i4.m1 stloc.0 leave.s End } End: ldloc.0 ret } Conclusion As you can see, the C# compiler has quite a few hoops to jump through to translate C# code into semantically-correct IL, and hides the numerous conditions on IL exception handling blocks from the C# programmer. Next up: catch-all blocks, and how the runtime deals with non-Exception exceptions.

    Read the article

  • Should I unit test the model returned by DefaultModelBinder?

    - by Byron Sommardahl
    I'm having some trouble unit testing the model returned by DefaultModelBinder. I want to feed in a fake form collection and check the model that it returns to make sure model properties are being bound properly. In my research, I'm not turning up -any- resources on testing the DefaultModelBinder. Maybe I'm missing something. Maybe I shouldn't be testing this part of MVC? Your thoughts?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >