Search Results

Search found 209 results on 9 pages for 'mocks'.

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

• How can I force maven to use my mock version of dependencies during the test phase.

  - by Jayd16

  Hi, so I have a Java application with a that accesses some web services. I want to mock out the appropriate classes so I can just use a few hard coded request/responses and I want maven to seamlessly use them during the tests and ignore them during the final build. I want maven2 to: 1)compile my mock classes 2)compile the main classes that depend on the mocked code 3)run tests 4)recompile any main classes with the real dependencies, not my mocks 5)finish up the maven install Ideally I want to just name my mock classes the same as my main class and just keep them in src/test/mocks or something. I'm kind of new to maven and so far it looks like maven will only compile the src/main and then src/test but I'm hoping I can have my way. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Review: Backbone.js Testing

  - by george_v_reilly

  Title: Backbone.js Testing Author: Ryan Roemer Rating: $stars(4.5) Publisher: Packt Copyright: 2013 ISBN: 178216524X Pages: 168 Keywords: programming, testing, javascript, backbone, mocha, chai, sinon Reading period: October 2013 Backbone.js Testing is a short, dense introduction to testing JavaScript applications with three testing libraries, Mocha, Chai, and Sinon.JS. Although the author uses a sample application of a personal note manager written with Backbone.js throughout the book, much of the material would apply to any JavaScript client or server framework. Mocha is a test framework that can be executed in the browser or by Node.js, which runs your tests. Chai is a framework-agnostic TDD/BDD assertion library. Sinon.JS provides standalone test spies, stubs and mocks for JavaScript. They complement each other and the author does a good job of explaining when and how to use each. I've written a lot of tests in Python (unittest and mock, primarily) and C# (NUnit), but my experience with JavaScript unit testing was both limited and years out of date. The JavaScript ecosystem continues to evolve rapidly, with new browser frameworks and Node packages springing up everywhere. JavaScript has some particular challenges in testing—notably, asynchrony and callbacks. Mocha, Chai, and Sinon meet those challenges, though they can't take away all the pain. The author describes how to test Backbone models, views, and collections; dealing with asynchrony; provides useful testing heuristics, including isolating components to reduce dependencies; when to use stubs and mocks and fake servers; and test automation with PhantomJS. He does not, however, teach you Backbone.js itself; for that, you'll need another book. There are a few areas which I thought were dealt with too lightly. There's no real discussion of Test-driven_development or Behavior-driven_development, which provide the intellectual foundations of much of the book. Nor does he have much to say about testability and how to make legacy code more testable. The sample Notes app has plenty of testing seams (much of this falls naturally out of the architecture of Backbone); other apps are not so lucky. The chapter on automation is extremely terse—it could be expanded into a very large book!—but it does provide useful indicators to many areas for exploration. I learned a lot from this book and I have no hesitation in recommending it. Disclosure: Thanks to Ryan Roemer and Packt for a review copy of this book.

  Read the article

• How to mock an SqlDataReader using Moq - Update

  - by Simon G

  Hi, I'm new to moq and setting up mocks so i could do with a little help. Title says it all really - how do I mock up an SqlDataReader using Moq? Thanks Update After further testing this is what I have so far: private IDataReader MockIDataReader() { var moq = new Mock<IDataReader>(); moq.Setup( x => x.Read() ).Returns( true ); moq.Setup( x => x.Read() ).Returns( false ); moq.SetupGet<object>( x => x["Char"] ).Returns( 'C' ); return moq.Object; } private class TestData { public char ValidChar { get; set; } } private TestData GetTestData() { var testData = new TestData(); using ( var reader = MockIDataReader() ) { while ( reader.Read() ) { testData = new TestData { ValidChar = reader.GetChar( "Char" ).Value }; } } return testData; } The issue you is when I do reader.Read in my GetTestData() method its always empty. I need to know how to do something like reader.Stub( x => x.Read() ).Repeat.Once().Return( true ) as per the rhino mock example: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1792984/mocking-a-datareader-and-getting-a-rhino-mocks-exceptions-expectationviolationexc

  Read the article

• Delphi Mock Wizard

  - by Todd

  Let me preface this by saying I'm fairly new to Unit Testing, Mocks, Stubs, Etc... I've installed Delphi-Mock-Wizard. When I select a unit and "Generate Mock", a new unit is created but it's very basic and not anything what I understand Mocks to be. unit Unit1; (** WARNING - AUTO-GENERATED MOCK! Change this unit if you want to, but be aware that any changes you make will be lost if you regenerate the mock object (for instance, if the interface changes). My advice is to create a descendent class of your auto-generated mock - in a different unit - and override things there. That way you get to keep them. Also, the auto-generate code is not yet smart enough to generate stubs for inherited interfaces. In that case, change your mock declaration to inherit from a mock implementation that implements the missing interface. This, unfortunately, is a violation of the directive above. I'm working on it. You may also need to manually change the unit name, above. Another thing I am working on. **) interface uses PascalMock, TestInterfaces; type IThingy = interface; implementation end. Looking at the source there seems to be quite a bit commented out. I'm wondering, has anyone gotten this to work? My IDE is D2010. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Mocking attributes - C#

  - by bob

  I use custom Attributes in a project and I would like to integrate them in my unit-tests. Now I use Rhino Mocks to create my mocks but I don't see a way to add my attributes (and there parameters) to them. Did I miss something, or is it not possible? Other mocking framework? Or do I have to create dummy implementations with my attributes? example: I have an interface in a plugin-architecture (IPlugin) and there is an attribute to add meta info to a property. Then I look for properties with this attribute in the plugin implementation for extra processing (storing its value, mark as gui read-only...) Now when I create a mock can I add easily an attribute to a property or the object instance itself? EDIT: I found a post with the same question - link. The answer there is not 100% and it is Java... EDIT 2: It can be done... searched some more (on SO) and found 2 related questions (+ answers) here and here Now, is this already implemented in one or another mocking framework?

  Read the article

• What's the best practice to setup testing for ASP.Net MVC? What to use/process/etc?

  - by melaos

  hi there, i'm trying to learn how to properly setup testing for an ASP.Net MVC. and from what i've been reading here and there thus far, the definition of legacy code kind of piques my interests, where it mentions that legacy codes are any codes without unit tests. so i did my project in a hurry not having the time to properly setup unit tests for the app and i'm still learning how to properly do TDD and unit testing at the same time. then i came upon selenium IDE/RC and was using it to test on the browser end. it was during that time too that i came upon the concept of integration testing, so from my understanding it seems that unit testing should be done to define the test and basic assumptions of each function, and if the function is dependent on something else, that something else needs to be mocked so that the tests is always singular and can be run fast. Questions: so am i right to say that the project should have started with unit test with proper mocks using something like rhino mocks. then anything else which requires 3rd party dll, database data access etc to be done via integration testing using selenium? because i have a function which calls a third party dll, i'm not sure whether to write a unit test in nunit to just instantiate the object and pass it some dummy data which breaks the mocking part to test it or just cover that part in my selenium integration testing when i submit my forms and call the dll. and for user acceptance tests, is it safe to say we can just use selenium again? Am i missing something or is there a better way/framework? i'm trying to put in more tests for regression testing, and to ensure that nothing breaks when we put in new features. i also like the idea of TDD because it helps to better define the function, sort of like a meta documentation. thanks!! hope this question isn't too subjective because i need it for my case.

  Read the article

• Open source C# projects that have high code quality?

  - by Simucal

  Question: What are some open source C# projects I can download that implement many best-practices and have a relatively high code quality? Please accompany your answer with some of the reasons you consider the code is of high quality. Suggestions so far: SharpDevelop NHibernate Boo Rhino Mocks Mono Paint.NET - Not Open Source ASP.NET MVC Framework .Net Framework Source Code The Weekly Source Code (Scott Hanselman's Series) Microsoft's Pattern and Practices

  Read the article

• Is there such a tool for testing

  - by kjack

  Say one has a structural codebase where lots of the code is in GUI control events and has no tests. So such code, to my knowledge is not suitable for unit testing Is there a tool that can test each routine automatically replacing references to code elements external to the routine (be they functions, variables or GUI controls) with appropriate mocks(?) and record the results in a database for later comparison after code changes? So the testing program would have the duty of writing, running and reporting tests with minimal intervention?

  Read the article

• Google Mock for iPhone development?

  - by Cliff

  I have an interesting situation where I am refactoring a bunch of ObjC iPhone code to create a C++ API. I'm a novice to C++ and looking into C++ mocking frameworks to augment the work I'd done using OCUnit and poor man's mocks. I ran across googlemock and wanted to know if anyone has ever used it for iPhone development? Also, how can I share this (or mockpp) with other devs as it is an installable package and doesn't seem to lend itself to checking into a repository?

  Read the article

• What C# mocking framework to use?

  - by Corin

  I want to start using mock objects on my next C# project. After a quick google I've found there are many: NMock EasyMock.NET TypeMock Isolator Commercial / Paid Rhino Mocks Moq So my question is: what one is your favourite .NET mocking framework and why?

  Read the article

• pack uri validation

  - by Berryl

  What is the simplest way to verify that a pack uri can be found? For example, given pack://application:,,,Rhino.Mocks;3.5.0.1337;0b3305902db7183f;component/SomeImage.png how would I check whether the image actually exists? Cheers, Berryl

  Read the article

• Testing Rails Metal With Cucumber/rSpec

  - by nkabbara

  Hi, I'm trying to stub a third party service that my metal talks to. It seems rspec mocks/stubs don't extend all the way to the Metal. When I call stubbed methods on objects, it calls the original one and not the stubbed one. Any idea of how I can have rSpec doubles extend all the way to the metal? Thanks. -Nash

  Read the article

• When should I stub out a type by manually creating a "stub" version, rather than using a mocking fra

  - by Ben Aston

  Are there any circumstances where it is favourable to manually create a stub type, as opposed to using a mocking framework (such as Rhino Mocks) at the point of test. We take both these approaches in our projects. My gut feel when I look at the long list of stub versions of objects is that it will add maintenance overhead, and moves the implementation of the stub away from the point of test.

  Read the article

• How to migrate Cppunit tests into GoogleTest ?

  - by blz

  I have a bunch of module tests written in CPPunit with some mocks created by hand. I am looking for a way to migrate them to GoogleTest as smoothly as possible. Have you tried such an operation? What was the effort needed?

  Read the article

• Mocking using 'traditional' Record/Replay vs Moq model

  - by fung

  I'm new to mocks and am deciding on a mock framework. The Moq home quotes Currently, it's the only mocking library that goes against the generalized and somewhat unintuitive (especially for novices) Record/Reply approach from all other frameworks. Can anyone explain simply what the Record/Replay approach is and how Moq differs? What are the pros and cons of each especially from the point of deciding a framework? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Deep diving into open source code

  - by Raspar

  When do you feel that it's appropriate/necessary to take deeper dives into the source code of open source tools to gain an understanding of the toolsets that you use? (nHibernate, StructureMap, Rhino Mocks, etc.)

  Read the article

• Why do we need mocking frameworks like Easymock , JMock or Mockito?

  - by Praneeth

  Hi, We use hand written stubs in our unit tests and I'm exploring the need for a Mock framework like EasyMock or Mockito in our project. I do not find a compelling reason for switching to Mocking frameworks from hand written stubs. Can anyone please answer why one would opt for mocking frameworks when they are already doing unit tests using hand written mocks/stubs. Thanks

  Read the article

• how can protected members of base class be accessed during unit test?

  - by amateur

  I am creating a unit test in mstest with rhino mocks. I have a class A that inherits class B. I am testing class A and create an instance of it for my test. The class it inherits, "B", has some protected methods and protected properties that I would like to access for the benefit of my tests. For example, validate that a protected property on my base class has the expected value. Any ideas how I might access these protected properties of class B during my test?

  Read the article

• Mocking the Unmockable: Using Microsoft Moles with Gallio

  - by Thomas Weller

  Usual opensource mocking frameworks (like e.g. Moq or Rhino.Mocks) can mock only interfaces and virtual methods. In contrary to that, Microsoft’s Moles framework can ‘mock’ virtually anything, in that it uses runtime instrumentation to inject callbacks in the method MSIL bodies of the moled methods. Therefore, it is possible to detour any .NET method, including non-virtual/static methods in sealed types. This can be extremely helpful when dealing e.g. with code that calls into the .NET framework, some third-party or legacy stuff etc… Some useful collected resources (links to website, documentation material and some videos) can be found in my toolbox on Delicious under this link: http://delicious.com/thomasweller/toolbox+moles A Gallio extension for Moles Originally, Moles is a part of Microsoft’s Pex framework and thus integrates best with Visual Studio Unit Tests (MSTest). However, the Moles sample download contains some additional assemblies to also support other unit test frameworks. They provide a Moled attribute to ease the usage of mole types with the respective framework (there are extensions for NUnit, xUnit.net and MbUnit v2 included with the samples). As there is no such extension for the Gallio platform, I did the few required lines myself – the resulting Gallio.Moles.dll is included with the sample download. With this little assembly in place, it is possible to use Moles with Gallio like that: [Test, Moled] public void SomeTest() {     ... What you can do with it Moles can be very helpful, if you need to ‘mock’ something other than a virtual or interface-implementing method. This might be the case when dealing with some third-party component, legacy code, or if you want to ‘mock’ the .NET framework itself. Generally, you need to announce each moled type that you want to use in a test with the MoledType attribute on assembly level. For example: [assembly: MoledType(typeof(System.IO.File))] Below are some typical use cases for Moles. For a more detailed overview (incl. naming conventions and an instruction on how to create the required moles assemblies), please refer to the reference material above.  Detouring the .NET framework Imagine that you want to test a method similar to the one below, which internally calls some framework method:   public void ReadFileContent(string fileName) {     this.FileContent = System.IO.File.ReadAllText(fileName); } Using a mole, you would replace the call to the File.ReadAllText(string) method with a runtime delegate like so: [Test, Moled] [Description("This 'mocks' the System.IO.File class with a custom delegate.")] public void ReadFileContentWithMoles() {     // arrange ('mock' the FileSystem with a delegate)     System.IO.Moles.MFile.ReadAllTextString = (fname => fname == FileName ? FileContent : "WrongFileName");       // act     var testTarget = new TestTarget.TestTarget();     testTarget.ReadFileContent(FileName);       // assert     Assert.AreEqual(FileContent, testTarget.FileContent); } Detouring static methods and/or classes A static method like the below… public static string StaticMethod(int x, int y) {     return string.Format("{0}{1}", x, y); } … can be ‘mocked’ with the following: [Test, Moled] public void StaticMethodWithMoles() {     MStaticClass.StaticMethodInt32Int32 = ((x, y) => "uups");       var result = StaticClass.StaticMethod(1, 2);       Assert.AreEqual("uups", result); } Detouring constructors You can do this delegate thing even with a class’ constructor. The syntax for this is not all  too intuitive, because you have to setup the internal state of the mole, but generally it works like a charm. For example, to replace this c’tor… public class ClassWithCtor {     public int Value { get; private set; }       public ClassWithCtor(int someValue)     {         this.Value = someValue;     } } … you would do the following: [Test, Moled] public void ConstructorTestWithMoles() {     MClassWithCtor.ConstructorInt32 =            ((@class, @value) => new MClassWithCtor(@class) {ValueGet = () => 99});       var classWithCtor = new ClassWithCtor(3);       Assert.AreEqual(99, classWithCtor.Value); } Detouring abstract base classes You can also use this approach to ‘mock’ abstract base classes of a class that you call in your test. Assumed that you have something like that: public abstract class AbstractBaseClass {     public virtual string SaySomething()     {         return "Hello from base.";     } }      public class ChildClass : AbstractBaseClass {     public override string SaySomething()     {         return string.Format(             "Hello from child. Base says: '{0}'",             base.SaySomething());     } } Then you would set up the child’s underlying base class like this: [Test, Moled] public void AbstractBaseClassTestWithMoles() {     ChildClass child = new ChildClass();     new MAbstractBaseClass(child)         {                 SaySomething = () => "Leave me alone!"         }         .InstanceBehavior = MoleBehaviors.Fallthrough;       var hello = child.SaySomething();       Assert.AreEqual("Hello from child. Base says: 'Leave me alone!'", hello); } Setting the moles behavior to a value of  MoleBehaviors.Fallthrough causes the ‘original’ method to be called if a respective delegate is not provided explicitly – here it causes the ChildClass’ override of the SaySomething() method to be called. There are some more possible scenarios, where the Moles framework could be of much help (e.g. it’s also possible to detour interface implementations like IEnumerable<T> and such…). One other possibility that comes to my mind (because I’m currently dealing with that), is to replace calls from repository classes to the ADO.NET Entity Framework O/R mapper with delegates to isolate the repository classes from the underlying database, which otherwise would not be possible… Usage Since Moles relies on runtime instrumentation, mole types must be run under the Pex profiler. This only works from inside Visual Studio if you write your tests with MSTest (Visual Studio Unit Test). While other unit test frameworks generally can be used with Moles, they require the respective tests to be run via command line, executed through the moles.runner.exe tool. A typical test execution would be similar to this: moles.runner.exe <mytests.dll> /runner:<myframework.console.exe> /args:/<myargs> So, the moled test can be run through tools like NCover or a scripting tool like MSBuild (which makes them easy to run in a Continuous Integration environment), but they are somewhat unhandy to run in the usual TDD workflow (which I described in some detail here). To make this a bit more fluent, I wrote a ReSharper live template to generate the respective command line for the test (it is also included in the sample download – moled_cmd.xml). - This is just a quick-and-dirty ‘solution’. Maybe it makes sense to write an extra Gallio adapter plugin (similar to the many others that are already provided) and include it with the Gallio download package, if  there’s sufficient demand for it. As of now, the only way to run tests with the Moles framework from within Visual Studio is by using them with MSTest. From the command line, anything with a managed console runner can be used (provided that the appropriate extension is in place)… A typical Gallio/Moles command line (as generated by the mentioned R#-template) looks like that: "%ProgramFiles%\Microsoft Moles\bin\moles.runner.exe" /runner:"%ProgramFiles%\Gallio\bin\Gallio.Echo.exe" "Gallio.Moles.Demo.dll" /args:/r:IsolatedAppDomain /args:/filter:"ExactType:TestFixture and Member:ReadFileContentWithMoles" -- Note: When using the command line with Echo (Gallio’s console runner), be sure to always include the IsolatedAppDomain option, otherwise the tests won’t use the instrumentation callbacks! -- License issues As I already said, the free mocking frameworks can mock only interfaces and virtual methods. if you want to mock other things, you need the Typemock Isolator tool for that, which comes with license costs (Although these ‘costs’ are ridiculously low compared to the value that such a tool can bring to a software project, spending money often is a considerable gateway hurdle in real life...).  The Moles framework also is not totally free, but comes with the same license conditions as the (closely related) Pex framework: It is free for academic/non-commercial use only, to use it in a ‘real’ software project requires an MSDN Subscription (from VS2010pro on). The demo solution The sample solution (VS 2008) can be downloaded from here. It contains the Gallio.Moles.dll which provides the here described Moled attribute, the above mentioned R#-template (moled_cmd.xml) and a test fixture containing the above described use case scenarios. To run it, you need the Gallio framework (download) and Microsoft Moles (download) being installed in the default locations. Happy testing…

  Read the article

• Rspec2, Rails3, Authlogic: Can't run specs

  - by Sam

  When I do rspec spec in my rails project, I get No examples were matched. Perhaps {:if=>#<Proc:0x0000010126e998@/Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/rspec-core-2.3.1/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:50 (lambda)>, :unless=>#<Proc:0x0000010126e970@/Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/rspec-core-2.3.1/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:51 (lambda)>} is excluding everything? Finished in 0.00004 seconds 0 examples, 0 failures Now, this seems like maybe if I wrote a spec it would work, but as soon as I write a spec (and I do include spec_helper) /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/rspec-core-2.3.1/lib/rspec/core/backward_compatibility.rb:20:in `const_missing': uninitialized constant Authlogic (NameError) from /{myapp}/app/models/user_session.rb:1:in `<top (required)>' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/engine.rb:138:in `block (2 levels) in eager_load!' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/engine.rb:137:in `each' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/engine.rb:137:in `block in eager_load!' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/engine.rb:135:in `each' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/engine.rb:135:in `eager_load!' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/application.rb:108:in `eager_load!' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/application/finisher.rb:41:in `block in <module:Finisher>' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/initializable.rb:25:in `instance_exec' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/initializable.rb:25:in `run' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/initializable.rb:50:in `block in run_initializers' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/initializable.rb:49:in `each' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/initializable.rb:49:in `run_initializers' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/application.rb:134:in `initialize!' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/application.rb:77:in `method_missing' from /{myapp}/config/environment.rb:5:in `<top (required)>' from <internal:lib/rubygems/custom_require>:29:in `require' from <internal:lib/rubygems/custom_require>:29:in `require' from /{myapp}/spec/spec_helper.rb:3:in `<top (required)>' from <internal:lib/rubygems/custom_require>:29:in `require' from <internal:lib/rubygems/custom_require>:29:in `require' from /{myapp}/spec/controllers/pages_controller_spec.rb:1:in `<top (required)>' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/rspec-core-2.3.1/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:388:in `load' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/rspec-core-2.3.1/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:388:in `block in load_spec_files' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/rspec-core-2.3.1/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:388:in `map' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/rspec-core-2.3.1/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:388:in `load_spec_files' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/rspec-core-2.3.1/lib/rspec/core/command_line.rb:18:in `run' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/rspec-core-2.3.1/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:55:in `run_in_process' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/rspec-core-2.3.1/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:46:in `run' from /Users/samliu/.rvm/gems/ruby-1.9.2-p0@rails3/gems/rspec-core-2.3.1/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:10:in `block in autorun' The important line here seems to be /core/backward_compatibility.rb:20:in `const_missing': uninitialized constant Authlogic (NameError) Now if this were rails 2.3.8, I'd simply put config.gem "authlogic" into the environment.rb, in the initialization code block. However, the rails 3 environment.rb looks way different (there is no config code block, so putting it in arbitrarily causes an error where config is not defined). So my questions are 1) Do I actually have to put the gem config anywhere? I looked at https://github.com/trevmex/authlogic_rails3_example/ and it seems he didn't put it anywhere. 2) Does anyone know what I'm doing wrong in terms of rspec? My gem list is *** LOCAL GEMS *** abstract (1.0.0) actionmailer (3.0.3, 3.0.1, 3.0.0, 3.0.0.rc2, 2.3.4) actionpack (3.0.3, 3.0.1, 3.0.0, 3.0.0.rc2, 2.3.4) activemodel (3.0.3, 3.0.1, 3.0.0, 3.0.0.rc2) activerecord (3.0.3, 3.0.1, 3.0.0, 3.0.0.rc2, 2.3.4) activeresource (3.0.3, 3.0.1, 3.0.0, 3.0.0.rc2, 2.3.4) activesupport (3.0.3, 3.0.1, 3.0.0, 3.0.0.rc2, 2.3.4) arel (2.0.6, 1.0.1) asdf (0.5.0) authlogic (2.1.6, 2.1.3) autotest (4.4.6, 4.4.1) autotest-fsevent (0.2.4) autotest-growl (0.2.9) autotest-rails (4.1.0) autotest-rails-pure (4.1.2) bluecloth (2.0.9) builder (2.1.2) bundler (1.0.7, 1.0.2) cgi_multipart_eof_fix (2.5.0) commonwatir (1.6.2) couchrest (0.33) cri (1.0.1) cucumber (0.4.4, 0.4.3, 0.3.11) daemons (1.1.0, 1.0.10) dependencies (0.0.7) diff-lcs (1.1.2) erubis (2.6.6) fastercsv (1.5.0) fastthread (1.0.7) firewatir (1.6.2) flay (1.4.0) flog (2.2.0) funfx (0.2.2) gem_plugin (0.2.3) gemsonrails (0.7.2) giraffesoft-resource_controller (0.6.5) haml (2.2.14) hoe (2.3.3) i18n (0.4.1) jscruggs-metric_fu (1.1.5) json_pure (1.1.9) kramdown (0.12.0) mail (2.2.13, 2.2.6.1) memcache-client (1.8.5) mime-types (1.16) mojombo-chronic (0.3.0) mongrel (1.1.5) monk (0.0.7) nanoc (3.1.5) nanoc3 (3.1.5) nokogiri (1.4.3.1, 1.4.0) open4 (0.9.6) polyglot (0.3.1, 0.2.9) rack (1.2.1, 1.0.1) rack-mount (0.6.13) rack-test (0.5.6) rails (3.0.0, 2.3.4) rails3-generators (0.17.0, 0.14.0) railties (3.0.3, 3.0.1, 3.0.0, 3.0.0.rc2) rake (0.8.7) relevance-rcov (0.9.2.1) rest-client (1.0.3) rspec (2.3.0, 2.0.0.rc, 1.2.9) rspec-core (2.3.1, 2.0.0.rc) rspec-expectations (2.3.0, 2.0.0.rc) rspec-mocks (2.3.0, 2.0.0.rc) rspec-rails (2.3.1, 2.0.0.rc, 1.2.9) ruby_parser (2.0.4) rubyforge (2.0.3) rubygems-update (1.3.6, 1.3.5) rvm (1.0.13) s4t-utils (1.0.4) safariwatir (0.3.7) sexp_processor (3.0.3) spork (0.7.3) sqlite3-ruby (1.3.1, 1.2.5) sys-uname (0.8.5) term-ansicolor (1.0.4) text-format (1.0.0) text-hyphen (1.0.0) thor (0.14.6, 0.14.3, 0.12.0) treetop (1.4.8, 1.4.2) tzinfo (0.3.23) user-choices (1.1.6) vlad (2.0.0) vlad-git (2.1.0) webrat (0.7.1, 0.6.0, 0.5.3) xml-simple (1.0.12) ZenTest (4.4.2) I am using ruby 1.9.2 and rails 3.0.3 installed using RVM on OSX 10.6 Snow Leopard. I just want to be able to run my specs like I used to. As a separate issue, autotest yields an error about an include for autotest/growl but I installed autotest-growl. Maybe this is a gem issue? I tried doing the same things and get the same error when it comes to using my ubuntu 10.04 server machine though. Gemfile source 'http://rubygems.org' gem 'rails', '3.0.3' # Bundle edge Rails instead: # gem 'rails', :git => 'git://github.com/rails/rails.git' gem 'sqlite3-ruby', :require => 'sqlite3' group :couch do gem 'couchrest' end group :user_auth do gem 'authlogic' gem "rails3-generators" gem 'facebooker' end group :markup do gem 'haml' gem 'sass' end group :testing do gem 'rspec-rails' gem 'rspec' gem 'webrat' gem 'cucumber' gem 'capybara' gem 'factory_girl' gem 'shoulda' gem 'autotest' end group :server do gem 'unicorn' end # Use unicorn as the web server # gem 'unicorn' # Deploy with Capistrano # gem 'capistrano' # To use debugger # gem 'ruby-debug' # Bundle the extra gems: # gem 'bj' # gem 'nokogiri' # gem 'sqlite3-ruby', :require => 'sqlite3' # gem 'aws-s3', :require => 'aws/s3' # Bundle gems for the local environment. Make sure to # put test-only gems in this group so their generators # and rake tasks are available in development mode: # group :development, :test do # gem 'webrat' # end Gemfile.lock GEM remote: http://rubygems.org/ specs: ZenTest (4.4.2) abstract (1.0.0) actionmailer (3.0.3) actionpack (= 3.0.3) mail (~> 2.2.9) actionpack (3.0.3) activemodel (= 3.0.3) activesupport (= 3.0.3) builder (~> 2.1.2) erubis (~> 2.6.6) i18n (~> 0.4) rack (~> 1.2.1) rack-mount (~> 0.6.13) rack-test (~> 0.5.6) tzinfo (~> 0.3.23) activemodel (3.0.3) activesupport (= 3.0.3) builder (~> 2.1.2) i18n (~> 0.4) activerecord (3.0.3) activemodel (= 3.0.3) activesupport (= 3.0.3) arel (~> 2.0.2) tzinfo (~> 0.3.23) activeresource (3.0.3) activemodel (= 3.0.3) activesupport (= 3.0.3) activesupport (3.0.3) arel (2.0.6) authlogic (2.1.6) activesupport autotest (4.4.6) ZenTest (>= 4.4.1) builder (2.1.2) capybara (0.4.0) celerity (>= 0.7.9) culerity (>= 0.2.4) mime-types (>= 1.16) nokogiri (>= 1.3.3) rack (>= 1.0.0) rack-test (>= 0.5.4) selenium-webdriver (>= 0.0.27) xpath (~> 0.1.2) celerity (0.8.6) childprocess (0.1.6) ffi (~> 0.6.3) couchrest (1.0.1) json (>= 1.4.6) mime-types (>= 1.15) rest-client (>= 1.5.1) cucumber (0.10.0) builder (>= 2.1.2) diff-lcs (~> 1.1.2) gherkin (~> 2.3.2) json (~> 1.4.6) term-ansicolor (~> 1.0.5) culerity (0.2.13) diff-lcs (1.1.2) erubis (2.6.6) abstract (>= 1.0.0) facebooker (1.0.75) json_pure (>= 1.0.0) factory_girl (1.3.2) ffi (0.6.3) rake (>= 0.8.7) gherkin (2.3.2) json (~> 1.4.6) term-ansicolor (~> 1.0.5) haml (3.0.25) i18n (0.5.0) json (1.4.6) json_pure (1.4.6) kgio (2.0.0) mail (2.2.13) activesupport (>= 2.3.6) i18n (>= 0.4.0) mime-types (~> 1.16) treetop (~> 1.4.8) mime-types (1.16) nokogiri (1.4.4) polyglot (0.3.1) rack (1.2.1) rack-mount (0.6.13) rack (>= 1.0.0) rack-test (0.5.6) rack (>= 1.0) rails (3.0.3) actionmailer (= 3.0.3) actionpack (= 3.0.3) activerecord (= 3.0.3) activeresource (= 3.0.3) activesupport (= 3.0.3) bundler (~> 1.0) railties (= 3.0.3) rails3-generators (0.17.0) railties (>= 3.0.0) railties (3.0.3) actionpack (= 3.0.3) activesupport (= 3.0.3) rake (>= 0.8.7) thor (~> 0.14.4) rake (0.8.7) rest-client (1.6.1) mime-types (>= 1.16) rspec (2.3.0) rspec-core (~> 2.3.0) rspec-expectations (~> 2.3.0) rspec-mocks (~> 2.3.0) rspec-core (2.3.1) rspec-expectations (2.3.0) diff-lcs (~> 1.1.2) rspec-mocks (2.3.0) rspec-rails (2.3.1) actionpack (~> 3.0) activesupport (~> 3.0) railties (~> 3.0) rspec (~> 2.3.0) rubyzip (0.9.4) sass (3.1.0.alpha.206) selenium-webdriver (0.1.2) childprocess (~> 0.1.5) ffi (~> 0.6.3) json_pure rubyzip shoulda (2.11.3) sqlite3-ruby (1.3.2) term-ansicolor (1.0.5) thor (0.14.6) treetop (1.4.9) polyglot (>= 0.3.1) tzinfo (0.3.23) unicorn (3.1.0) kgio (~> 2.0.0) rack webrat (0.7.2) nokogiri (>= 1.2.0) rack (>= 1.0) rack-test (>= 0.5.3) xpath (0.1.2) nokogiri (~> 1.3) PLATFORMS ruby DEPENDENCIES authlogic autotest capybara couchrest cucumber facebooker factory_girl haml rails (= 3.0.3) rails3-generators rspec rspec-rails sass shoulda sqlite3-ruby unicorn webrat

  Read the article

• DDD Melbourne -lessons leant

  - by Michael Freidgeim

  I've attended DDD Melbourne and want to list the interesting points, that I've leant and want to follow. To read more: * Moles-Mocking Isolation framework for .NET. Documentation is here.   (See also Mocking frameworks comparison created October 4, 2009 ) * WebFormsMVP * PluralSight   http://www.pluralsight-training.net/offers/default.aspx?cc=trial   * ELMAH: Error Logging Modules and Handlers *Rhino.Mocks   * VS UI Test Recorder -see posts Visual Studio 2010 Coded UI Test User Guide. Note that Microsoft Test Manager (MTM) toolis a separate application, that can be started from Program files/VS 2010 menu.It is not a menu inside Visual Studio.   * CodeContract- seems great in Debug. Will be good if in production  will be possible runtime configuration, ability to log instead of throw exception. Current recommendation to customize Debug.Assert is not trivial The programmer is free to use the customization provided by Debug.Assert using assert listeners to obtain whatever runtime behavior they desire (e.g., ignoring the error, logging it, or throwing an exception).   // Clears the existing list of assert listener (the default pop-up box) System.Diagnostics.Debug.Listeners.Clear(); // Install your own listener System.Diagnostics.Debug.Listeners.Add(MyTraceListener); Note that you can't catch specific ContractException, but can catch generic Exception(see How come you cannot catch Code Contract exceptions?)   Books recommended "Working effectively with legacy code" by Michael Feathers (corresponding article)   Fowler, Martin Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code, slides http://jaoo.dk/jaoo1999/schedule/MartinFowlerRefractoring.pdf

  Read the article

• The Silverlightning Talks

  - by Brian Genisio's House Of Bilz

  Tomorrow, I will be speaking in Grand Rapids at the Silverlight Firestarter.  It is a one day event intended to get people bootstrapped with Silverlight.  I will be giving the “Advanced Topics” presentation.  I have decided to run it as a series of “Lightning Talks”.  The idea is to give a lot of breadth so you know that the topic exists and move quickly between them.  To go along with the talks, here are a bunch of links that you might find useful: MVVM http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dd458800.aspx http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dd419663.aspx http://channel9.msdn.com/shows/Continuum/MVVM/ http://karlshifflett.wordpress.com/2008/11/08/learning-wpf-m-v-vm/ http://johnpapa.net/silverlight/5-minute-overview-of-mvvm-in-silverlight/ Good MVVM Frameworks http://www.galasoft.ch/mvvm/getstarted/ http://caliburn.codeplex.com/Wikipage   Prism http://compositewpf.codeplex.com/ http://mtaulty.com/CommunityServer/blogs/mike_taultys_blog/archive/2009/10/27/prism-and-silverlight-screencasts-on-channel-9.aspx http://www.grumpydev.com/2009/07/04/why-shouldn%E2%80%99t-i-use-prism/   Unit Testing Silverlight Unit Testing Framework http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/silverlightut http://silverlight.codeplex.com/ http://www.jeff.wilcox.name/2008/03/silverlight2-unit-testing/ NUnit Testing with Silverlight http://weblogs.asp.net/nunitaddin/archive/2008/05/01/silverlight-nunit-projects.aspx Useful Testing Tools http://testdriven.net/ http://nunit.org/ http://code.google.com/p/moq/ http://www.ayende.com/projects/rhino-mocks.aspx   Navigation Framework http://www.silverlightshow.net/items/The-Silverlight-3-Navigation-Framework.aspx http://www.silverlight.net/learn/videos/silverlight-videos/navigation-framework/   Farseer Physics Engine http://farseerphysics.codeplex.com/Wikipage http://physicshelper.codeplex.com/Wikipage http://www.andybeaulieu.com/Home/tabid/67/Default.aspx   Windows Phone 7 http://www.silverlight.net/getstarted/devices/windows-phone/ http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff402535%28VS.92%29.aspx

  Read the article

• unit level testing, agile, and refactoring

  - by dsollen

  I'm working on a very agile development system, a small number of people with my doing the vast majority of progaming myself. I've gotten to the testing phase and find myself writing mostly functional level testing, which I should in theory be leavning for our tester (in practice I don't entirely...trust our tester to detect and identify defects enough to leave him the sole writter of functional tests). In theory what I should be writing is Unit level tests. However, I'm not sure it's worth the expense. Unit testing takes some time to do, more then functional testing since I have to set up mocks and plugs into smaller units that weren't design to run in issolation. More importantly, I find I refactor and redesign heavily-part of this is due to my inherriting code that needed heavy redesign and is still being cleaned up, but even once I've finished removing parts that need work I'm sure in the act of expanding the code I'll still do a decent amount of refactoring and redesign. It feels as if I will break my unit tests, forcing wasted time to refactor them as well, often due to unit test, by definition, having to be coupled so closely to the code structure. So.is it worth all the wasted time when functional tests, that will never break when I refactor/redesign, should find most defects? Do unit tests really provide that much extra defect detetection over through functional? and how does one create good unit tests that work with very quick and agile code that is modified rapidly? ps, I would be fine/happy with links to anything one considers an excellent resource for how to 'do' unit testing in a highly changing enviroment. edit: to clarify I am doing a bit of very unoffical TDD, I just seem to be writing tests on what would be considered a functional level rather then unit level. I think part of this is becaus I own nearly all of the project I don't feel I need to limit the scope as much; and part of it is that it's daunting to think of trying to go back and retroactively add the unit tests needed to cover enough code that I can feel comfortable testing only a unit without the full functionality and trust that unit still works with the rest of the units.

  Read the article

• When creating an library published on CodePlex, how "bad" would it be for the unit-test projects to rely on commercial products?

  - by Lasse V. Karlsen

  I have started a project on CodePlex for a WebDAV server implementation for .NET, so that I can host a WebDAV server in my own programs. This is both a learning/research project (WebDAV + server portion) as well as a project I think I can have much fun with, both in terms of making it and using it. However, I see a need to do mocking of types here in order to unit-testing properly. For instance, I will be relying on HttpListener for the web server portion of the WebDAV server, and since this type has no interface, and is sealed, I cannot easily make mocks or stubs out of it. Unless I use something like TypeMock. So if I used TypeMock in the unit-test projects on this library, how bad would this be for potential users? The projects are made in C# 3.5 for .NET 3.5 and 4.0, and the project files was created with Visual Studio 2010 Professional. The actual class libraries you would end up referencing in your software would of course not be encumbered with anything remotely like this, only the unit-test libraries. What's your thoughts on this? As an example, I have in my old code-base, which is private, the ability to just initiate a WebDAV server with just this: var server = new WebDAVServer(); This constructs, and owns, a HttpListener instance internally, and I would like to verify through unit-tests that if I dispose of this server object, the internal listener is disposed of. If, on the other hand, I use the overload where I hand it a listener object, this object should not be disposed of. Short of exposing the internal listener object to the outside world, something I'm a bit loath to do, how can I in a good way ensure that the object was disposed of? With TypeMock I can mock away parts of this object even though it isn't accessed through interfaces. The alternative would be for me to wrap everything in wrapper classes, where I have complete control.

  Read the article

• Should we test all our methods?

  - by Zenzen

  So today I had a talk with my teammate about unit testing. The whole thing started when he asked me "hey, where are the tests for that class, I see only one?". The whole class was a manager (or a service if you prefer to call it like that) and almost all the methods were simply delegating stuff to a DAO so it was similar to: SomeClass getSomething(parameters) { return myDao.findSomethingBySomething(parameters); } A kind of boilerplate with no logic (or at least I do not consider such simple delegation as logic) but a useful boilerplate in most cases (layer separation etc.). And we had a rather lengthy discussion whether or not I should unit test it (I think that it is worth mentioning that I did fully unit test the DAO). His main arguments being that it was not TDD (obviously) and that someone might want to see the test to check what this method does (I do not know how it could be more obvious) or that in the future someone might want to change the implementation and add new (or more like "any") logic to it (in which case I guess someone should simply test that logic). This made me think, though. Should we strive for the highest test coverage %? Or is it simply an art for art's sake then? I simply do not see any reason behind testing things like: getters and setters (unless they actually have some logic in them) "boilerplate" code Obviously a test for such a method (with mocks) would take me less than a minute but I guess that is still time wasted and a millisecond longer for every CI. Are there any rational/not "flammable" reasons to why one should test every single (or as many as he can) line of code?

  Read the article

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