Search Results

Search found 4724 results on 189 pages for 's unit'.

Page 46/189 | < Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >

• Visual Studio Unit Tests : dll is not trusted

  - by Ian

  I'm struggling getting some unit tests running and wondering if anyone might have anything insightful. The setup is that we've got a bunch of referenced DLL's on a server and when I try and execute I get the old Test Run deployment issue: The location of the file or directory 'c:\source\ProjectName\bin\debug\3rdPartyLibrary.dll' is not trusted. I've tried the old caspol command: caspol -m -ag 1.2 -url file:\server\binaries* FullTrust Which seems to work for everything bar one DLL. I'm currently having to manually change the permissions everytime I do a build of the test project, which is a pain. Anyone have any suggestions? Running a Win7 64bit OS btw.

  Read the article

• ASP.NET MVC does not add ModelError when invoking from unit test

  - by Tomas Lycken

  I have a model item public class EntryInputModel { ... [Required(ErrorMessage = "Description is required.", AllowEmptyStrings = false)] public virtual string Description { get; set; } } and a controller action public ActionResult Add([Bind(Exclude = "Id")] EntryInputModel newEntry) { if (ModelState.IsValid) { var entry = Mapper.Map<EntryInputModel, Entry>(newEntry); repository.Add(entry); unitOfWork.SaveChanges(); return RedirectToAction("Details", new { id = entry.Id }); } return RedirectToAction("Create"); } When I create an EntryInputModel in a unit test, set the Description property to null and pass it to the action method, I still get ModelState.IsValid == true, even though I have debugged and verified that newEntry.Description == null. Why doesn't this work?

  Read the article

• Intelligent serial port mocks with Moq

  - by Padu Merloti

  I have to write a lot of code that deals with serial ports. Usually there will be a device connected at the other end of the wire and I usually create my own mocks to simulate their behavior. I'm starting to look at Moq to help with my unit tests. It's pretty simple to use it when you need just a stub, but I want to know if it is possible and if yes how do I create a mock for a hardware device that responds differently according to what I want to test. A simple example: One of the devices I interface with receives a command (move to position x), gives back an ACK message and goes to a "moving" state until it reaches the ordered position. I want to create a test where I send the move command and then keep querying state until it reaches the final position. I want to create two versions of the mock for two different tests, one where I expect the device to reach the final position successfully and the other where it will fail. Too much to ask?

  Read the article

• Hudson, C++ and UnitTest++

  - by Gilad Naor

  Has anyone used Hudson as a Continuous-Integration server for a C++ project using UnitTest++ as a testing library? How exactly did you set it up? I know there have been several questions on Continuous Integration before, but I hope this one has a narrower scope. EDIT: I'll clarify a bit on what I'm looking for. I already have the build set to fail when the Unit-Tests fail. I'm looking for something like Hudson's JUnit support. UnitTest++ can create XML reports (See here). So, perhaps if someone knows how to translate these reports to be JUnit compatible, Hudson will know how to eat it up?

  Read the article

• Testing with Qt's QTestLib module

  - by ak

  Hi I started writing some tests with Qt's unit testing system. How do you usually organize the tests? It is one test class per one module class, or do you test the whole module with a single test class? Qt docs (or some podcast that I recently watched) suggested to follow the former strategy. I want to write tests for a module. The module provides only one class that is going to be used by the module user, but there is a lot of logic abstracted in other classes, which I would also like to test, besides testing the public class. The problem is that Qt's proposed way to run tests involved the QTEST_MAIN macro: QTEST_MAIN(TestClass) #include "test_class.moc" and eventually one test program is capable of testing just one test class. And it kinda sucks to create test projects for every single class in the module. Of course, one could take a look at the QTEST_MAIN macro, rewrite it, and run other test classes. But is there something, that works out of the box?

  Read the article

• How to create tests for poco objects

  - by Simon G

  Hi, I'm new to mocking/testing and wanting to know what level should you go to when testing. For example in my code I have the following object: public class RuleViolation { public string ErrorMessage { get; private set; } public string PropertyName { get; private set; } public RuleViolation( string errorMessage ) { ErrorMessage = errorMessage; } public RuleViolation( string errorMessage, string propertyName ) { ErrorMessage = errorMessage; PropertyName = propertyName; } } This is a relatively simple object. So my question is: Does it need a unit test? If it does what do I test and how? Thanks

  Read the article

• Are TestContext.Properties read only ?

  - by DBJDBJ

  Using Visual Studio generate Test Unit class. Then comment out class initialization method. Inside it add your property, using the testContext argument. //Use ClassInitialize to run code before running the first test in the class [ClassInitialize()] public static void MyClassInitialize(TestContext testContext) { /* * Any user defined testContext.Properties * added here will be erased upon this method exit */ testContext.Properties.Add("key", 1 ) ; // above works but is lost } After leaving MyClassInitialize, properties defined by user are lost. Only the 10 "official" ones are left. This effectively means TestContext.Properties is read only, for users. Which is not clearly documented in MSDN. Please discuss. --DBJ

  Read the article

• Stub web calls in Scala

  - by Dennis Laumen

  I'm currently writing a wrapper of the Spotify Metadata API to learn Scala. Everything's fine and dandy but I'd like to unit test the code. To properly do this I'll need to stub the Spotify API and get consistent return values (stuff like popularity of tracks changes very frequently). Does anybody know how to stub web calls in Scala, the JVM in general or by using some external tool I could hook up into my Maven setup? PS I'm basically looking for something like Ruby's FakeWeb... Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Visual Studios Team System 2008 Code Coverage Window Closes

  - by ThoughtCrhyme

  Trying to run the code coverage tool in Visual Studios for a set of unit tests. Adam from Think First, Code Later has had the same problem: I wanted to get the code coverage metrics for the project. Naturally, I fire up the solution in Visual Studio 2008, go to the Test menu, click Edit Test Run Configurations, and click Local Test Run. I then click Code Coverage to turn on code coverage for a given assembly and POOF the Local Test Run Configraution window just disappears. He recommends installing this hotfix to fix the problem, however a) when I run that hotfix I get the message “None of the products that are addressed by this software update are installed on this computer. Click Cancel to exit setup.” and b) there is no Silverlight in our solution. Any other ideas for a fix?

  Read the article

• Why is my Extension Method not showing up in my test class?

  - by Robert Harvey

  I created an extension method called HasContentPermission on the System.Security.Principal.IIdentity interface: namespace System.Security.Principal { public static bool HasContentPermission (this IIdentity itentity, int contentID) { // I do stuff here return result; } } And I call it like this: bool hasPermission = User.Identity.HasPermission(contentID); Works like a charm. Now I want to unit test it. To do that, all I really need to do is call the extension method directly, so: using System.Security.Principal; namespace MyUnitTests { [TestMethod] public void HasContentPermission_PermissionRecordExists_ReturnsTrue() { IIdentity identity; bool result = identity.HasContentPermission(... But HasContentPermission won't intellisense. I tried creating a stub class that inherits from IIdentity, but that didn't work either. Why? Or am I going about this the wrong way?

  Read the article

• "dynamic" keyword and JSON data

  - by Peter Perhác

  An action method in my ASP.NET MVC2 application returns a JsonResult object and in my unit test I would like to check that the returned JSON object indeed contains the expected values. I tried this: 1. dynamic json = ((JsonResult)myActionResult).Data; 2. Assert.AreEqual(JsonMessagesHelper.ErrorLevel.ERROR.ToString(), json.ErrorLevel); But I get a RuntimeBinderException "'object' does not contain a definition for 'ErrorLevel'". However, when I place a breakpoint on line 2 and inspect the json dynamic variable (see picture below), it obviously does contain the ErrorLevel string and it has the expected value, so if the runtime binder wasn't playing funny the test would pass. What am I not getting? What am I doing wrong and how can I fix this? How can I make the assertion pass?

  Read the article

• Can rails test speed be increased?

  - by Sam

  Hi all, I'm a recent convert to TDD but as my codebase grows in size and complexity, I find myself waiting longer and longer periods for the framework to load every time I want to run a test. I am aware of rspec's spec_server but I'm using Test::Unit with shoulda. I tried Snailgun (http://github.com/candlerb/snailgun) but noticed very little increased in speed. I have also tried spork-testunit (http://github.com/timcharper/spork-testunit) but it's not fully compatible with my existing tests. The delay in running tests is a definite pain point and is putting me of TDD (at least with rails). Is anyone aware of any other options? thanks Sam

  Read the article

• NHibernate How to specify custom sql type only in production

  - by Davide Orazio Montersino

  I am saving binary files into a Sql Server 2005 Db using Fluent NHibernate. However, I am using SQLite to run my (pseudo) Unit Tests. I need to use a custom Sql type for Ms Sql, but it would throw an error on SqlLite. What strategies can I use? This is the Map file: public class BinaryFile { public BinaryFile() { m.Map(x => x.BinaryData);//.CustomSqlType("varbinary(MAX)"); m.Map(x => x.ContentType); m.Map(x => x.FileName); m.Map(x => x.FileSize); } }

  Read the article

• How do I diff two spreadsheets?

  - by neu242

  We have a lot of spreadsheets (xls) in our subversion repository. These are usually edited with gnumeric or openoffice.org, and are mostly used to populate databases for unit testing with dbUnit. There are no easy ways of doing diffs on xls files that I know of, and this makes merging extremely tedious and error prone. I've found Spreadsheet Compare, but it requires Excel 2000 or later. I've also tried to convert the spreadsheets to xml and doing a regular diff, but it really feels as a last resort. Are there any tools for diffing two spreadsheets (xls or ods)? I am primarily looking for a multi-platform/open source tool.

  Read the article

• How to test the XML sent to a web service in Ruby/Rails

  - by Jason Langenauer

  I'm looking for the best way to write unit test for code that POSTs to an external web service. The body of the POST request is an XML document which describes the actions and data for the web service to perform. Now, I've wrapped the webservice in its own class (similar to ActiveResource), and I can't see any way to test the exact XML being generated by the class without breaking encapsulation by exposing some of the internal XML generation as public methods on the class. This seems to be a code smell - from the point-of-view of the users of the class, they should not know, nor care, how the class actually implements the web service call, be it with XML, JSON or carrier pigeons. For an example of the class: class Resource def new #initialize the class end def save! Http.post("http://webservice.com", self.to_xml) end private def to_xml # returns an XML representation of self end end I want to be able to test the XML generated to ensure it conforms to what the specs for the web service are expecting. So can I best do this, without making to_xml a public method?

  Read the article

• C++ Testing framework integrated with Eclipse

  - by Mike

  I'm writing a C++ unit testing framework and I would like it if it could be integrated with Eclipse CDT. In other testing suites that work with Eclipse, JUnit for example, the user is provided a graphical list of all test cases and their results. Something like this would be the ideal. I'm just getting into this, so I need some advice on getting started. There are two approaches I see Use an existing Eclipse testing plugin (such as JUnit) and make the framework return output in the same format as the plugin's input. Write a plugin from scratch that can work with my framework (seems like it would take a lot of time) Thoughts appreciated

  Read the article

• mocking command object in grails controller results in hasErrors() return false no matter what! Plea

  - by egervari

  I have a controller that uses a command object in a controller action. When mocking this command object in a grails' controller unit test, the hasErrors() method always returns false, even when I am purposefully violating its constraints. def save = { RegistrationForm form -> if(form.hasErrors()) { // code block never gets executed } else { // code block always gets executed } } In the test itself, I do this: mockCommandObject(RegistrationForm) def form = new RegistrationForm(emailAddress: "ken.bad@gmail", password: "secret", confirmPassword: "wrong") controller.save(form) I am purposefully giving it a bad email address, and I am making sure the password and the confirmPassword properties are different. In this case, hasErrors() should return true... but it doesn't. I don't know how my testing can be any where reliable if such a basic thing does not work :/ Here is the RegistrationForm class, so you can see the constraints I am using: class RegistrationForm { def springSecurityService String emailAddress String password String confirmPassword String getEncryptedPassword() { springSecurityService.encodePassword(password) } static constraints = { emailAddress(blank: false, email: true) password(blank: false, minSize:4, maxSize: 10) confirmPassword(blank: false, validator: { confirmPassword, form -> confirmPassword == form.password }) } }

  Read the article

• Is there a strategy to back-port C# code?

  - by ianmayo

  Hi all, I intend using the Argotic framework in support of a .Net Atom server. Unfortunately my target server (over which I have no control) only has .Net 1.1 - any the Argotic library is only in .Net 2 and 3.5. So, I now need to back-port the code to 1.1. Can anybody provide any strategic tips for this undertaking? I'm aware of the merits of using Unit Tests to verify the ported code (here). should I be looking for automated tools? should I just import the code into VS2003 .Net 1.1 project and work through the compiler warnings? Any tips appreciated. cheers, Ian

  Read the article

• Any homologue of InternalsVisibleToAttribute, but for internal classes?

  - by Will Marcouiller

  In my most recent question: Unit Testing Best Practice? / C# InternalsVisibleTo() attribute for VBNET 2.0 while testing?, I was asking about InternalsVisibleToAttribute. I have read the documentation on how to use it, and everything is fine and understood. However, I can't instantiate my class Groupe from my Testing project. I want to be able to instantiate my internal class in my wrapper assembly, from my testing assembly. Any help is appreciated! EDIT Here's the compile-time error I get when I do try to instantiate my type: Erreur 2 'Carra.Exemples.Blocs.ActiveDirectory.Groupe' n'est pas accessible dans ce contexte, car il est 'Private'. C:\Open\Projects\Exemples\Src\Carra.Exemples.Blocs.ActiveDirectory\Carra.Exemples.Blocs.ActiveDirectory.Tests\GroupeTests.vb 9 18 Carra.Exemples.Blocs.ActiveDirectory.Tests (This says that my type is not accessible in this context, because it is private.) But it's Friend (internal)!

  Read the article

• How do I make this ASP.NET MVC controller more testable?

  - by Ragesh

  I have a controller that overrides OnActionExecuting and does something like this: protected override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) { base.OnActionExecuting(filterContext); string tenantDomain = filterContext.RouteData.Values["tenantDomain"] as string; if (!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(tenantDomain)) { using (var tx = BeginTransaction()) { this.Tenant = repo.FindOne(t => t.Domain == tenantDomain); } } } Tenant is a protected property with a private setter. The class itself is an abstract base controller that my real controllers derive from. I have code in other controllers that looks a lot like this: if (Tenant == null) { // Do something } else { // Do something else } How do I test this code? What I need to do is to somehow set the Tenant property, but I can't because: It's a protected property, and It has a private setter Changing the visibility of Tenant doesn't "feel" right. What are my alternatives to unit test my derived controllers?

  Read the article

• How do I ignore the UTF-8 Byte Order Marker in String comparisons?

  - by Skrud

  I'm having a problem comparing strings in a Unit Test in C# 4.0 using Visual Studio 2010. This same test case works properly in Visual Studio 2008 (with C# 3.5). Here's the relevant code snippet: byte[] rawData = GetData(); string data = Encoding.UTF8.GetString(rawData); Assert.AreEqual("Constant", data, false, CultureInfo.InvariantCulture); While debugging this test, the data string appears to the naked eye to contain exactly the same string as the literal. When I called data.ToCharArray(), I noticed that the first byte of the string data is the value 65279 which is the UTF-8 Byte Order Marker. What I don't understand is why Encoding.UTF8.GetString() keeps this byte around. How do I get Encoding.UTF8.GetString() to not put the Byte Order Marker in the resulting string?

  Read the article

• When is it appropriate to do interaction based testing as opposed to state based testing?

  - by Praneeth

  Hi, When I use Easymock(or a similar mocking framework) to implement my unit tests, I'm forced to do interaction-based testing (as I don't get to assert on the state of my dependencies. Or am I mistaken?). On the other hand if I use a hand written stub (instead of using easymock) I can implement state based testing. I'm quite unclear if I want to go with interaction based testing or state based testing. I'm biased and I want to use Easymock, but I'm not sure if there would be any side-effects that I may have to face in the future. Can anyone please throw some light on this? Thanks in advance!

  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

• How to configure a OCUnit test bundle for a framework?

  - by GuidoMB

  I've been developing a Mac OS X framework and I want to use OCUnit in my XCode 3.2.1 project. I've followed several tutorials on how to configure a OCUnit test bundle. The problem is that when I create a test case that uses a function that is defined in one of the framework's sources, I get a building error telling me that the symbol is not found. I made the test bundle dependent of my project's target as the tutorial said, but that doesn't seem to be problem. First I thought that I could solve this problem by dragging the framework's source files into the compile sources section within the Test bundle target, but then all the symbols referenced from that source file started to show up in the build errors, so that seems to not be a good solution/idea. How can I configure my unit test bundle so it builds properly?

  Read the article

• Does isolation frameworks (Moq, RhinoMock, etc) lead to test overspecification?

  - by Marius

  In Osherove's great book "The Art of Unit Testing" one of the test anti-patterns is over-specification which is basically the same as testing the internal state of the object instead of some expected output. To my experience, using Isolation frameworks can cause the same unwanted side effects as testing internal behavior because one tends to only implement the behavior necessary to make your stub interact with the object under test. Now if your implementation changes later on (but the contract remains the same), your test will suddenly break because you are expecting some data from the stub which was not implemented. So what do you think is the best approach to counter this? 1) Implement your stubs/mocks fully, this has the negative side-effect of potentially making your test less readable and also specifying more than necessary to make your test pass. 2) Favor manual, fully implemented fakes. 3) Implement your stubs/fakes so that they make your test just pass, and then deal with the brittleness that this might introduce.

  Read the article

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