Search Results

Search found 648 results on 26 pages for 'nunit mocks'.

Page 6/26 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • Moving from mock to real objects?

    - by jjchiw
    I'm like doing TDD so I started everything mocking objects, creating interface, stubbing, great. The design seems to work, now I'll implement the stuff, a lot of the code used in the stubs are going to be reused in my real implementation yay! Now should I duplicate the tests to use the real object implementation (but keeping the mocks object of the sensitive stuff like Database and "services" that are out of my context (http calls, etc...)) Or just change the mocks and stubs of the actual tests to use the real objects....... So the question is that, keep two tests or replace the stubs, mocks? And after that, I should keep designing with the mocks, stubs or just go with real objects? (Just making myself clear I'll keep the mock object of the sensitive stuff like database and services that are out of my context, in both situations.)

    Read the article

  • Rhino Mocks, Dependency Injection, and Separation of Concerns

    - by whatispunk
    I am new to mocking and dependency injection and need some guidance. My application is using a typical N-Tier architecture where the BLL references the DAL, and the UI references the BLL but not the DAL. Pretty straight forward. Lets say, for example, I have the following classes: class MyDataAccess : IMyDataAccess {} class MyBusinessLogic {} Each exists in a separate assembly. I want to mock MyDataAccess in the tests for MyBusinessLogic. So I added a constructor to the MyBusinessLogic class to take an IMyDataAccess parameter for the dependency injection. But now when I try to create an instance of MyBusinessLogic on the UI layer it requires a reference to the DAL. I thought I could define a default constructor on MyBusinessLogic to set a default IMyDataAccess implementation, but not only does this seem like a codesmell it didn't actually solve the problem. I'd still have a public constructor with IMyDataAccess in the signature. So the UI layer still requires a reference to the DAL in order to compile. One possible solution I am toying with is to create an internal constructor for MyBusinessLogic with the IMyDataAccess parameter. Then I can use an Accessor from the test project to call the constructor. But there's still that smell. What is the common solution here. I must just be doing something wrong. How could I improve the architecture?

    Read the article

  • Recursive mocking with Rhino-Mocks

    - by jaspernygaard
    Hi I'm trying to unittest several MVP implementations and can't quite figure out the best way to mock the view. I'll try to boil it down. The view IView consists e.g. of a property of type IControl. interface IView { IControl Control1 { get; } IControl Control2 { get; } } interface IControl { bool Enabled { get; set; } object Value { get; set; } } My question is whether there's a simple way to setup the property behavior for Enabled and Value on the IControl interface members on the IView interface - like recursive mocking a guess. I would rather not setup expectations for all my properties on the view (quite a few on each view). Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • asp.net mvc rhino mocks mocking httprequest values

    - by Matthew
    Hi Is there a way to mock request params, what is the best approach when testing to create fake request values in order to run a test would some thing like this work? _context = MockRepository.GenerateStub<HttpContext>(); request = MockRepository.GenerateStub<HttpRequest>(); var collection = new NameValueCollection(); collection.Add("", ""); SetupResult.For(request.Params).Return(collection); SetupResult.For(_context.Request).Return(request);

    Read the article

  • Constructing mocks in unit tests

    - by Flynn1179
    Is there any way to have a mock constructed instead of a real instance when testing code that calls a constructor? For example: public class ClassToTest { public void MethodToTest() { MyObject foo = new MyObject(); Console.WriteLine(foo.ToString()); } } In this example, I need to create a unit test that confirms that calling MethodToTest on an instance of ClassToTest will indeed output whatever the result of the ToString() method of a newly created instance of MyObject. I can't see a way of realistically testing the 'ClassToTest' class in isolation; testing this method would actually test the 'myObject.ToString()' method as well as the MethodToTest method.

    Read the article

  • Difference in techniques for setting a stubbed method's return value with Rhino Mocks

    - by CRice
    What is the main difference between these following two ways to give a method some fake implementation? I was using the second way fine in one test but in another test the behaviour can not be achieved unless I go with the first way. These are set up via: IMembershipService service = test.Stub<IMembershipService>(); so (the first), using (test.Record()) //test is MockRepository instance { service.GetUser("dummyName"); LastCall.Return(new LoginUser()); } vs (the second). service.Stub(r => r.GetUser("dummyName")).Return(new LoginUser()); Edit The problem is that the second technique returns null in the test, when I expect it to return a new LoginUser. The first technique behaves as expected by returning a new LoginUser. All other test code used in both cases is identical.

    Read the article

  • Do I need something more to run NUnit under any directory?

    - by prosseek
    I have NUnit installed at this directory. C:\Program Files\NUnit 2.5.5\bin\net-2.0 When I try to run my unit test (mut.dll) in some random directory. I get the following error. I have to copy the mut.dll under the NUnit directory in order to run it. ProcessModel: Default DomainUsage: Single Execution Runtime: net-2.0 Could not load file or assembly 'nunit.framework, Version=2.5.5.10112, Culture=n eutral, PublicKeyToken=96d09a1eb7f44a77' or one of its dependencies. The system cannot find the file specified. What's wrong? Is there anything that I have to configure to run NUNit under any directory?

    Read the article

  • Why does trying to unit test with two .NET 4.0 assemblies under NUnit 2.5.4 fail?

    - by GiddyUpHorsey
    I have an MSBuild script that uses NUnit to run tests in two assemblies. These were on .NET Framework 3.5 and it worked perfectly for a long time. The command line was: (actual paths & names simplified) nunit-console tests1\bin\debug\tests1.dll tests2\bin\tests2.dll I've upgraded to VS2010 and have now made the two test assemblies target .NET 4.0. I've also upgraded to NUnit 2.5.4. I can unit test a single assembly with the following: nunit-console tests1\bin\debug\tests1.dll /framework=4.0.30319 It works fine with either tests1.dll or tests2.dll. If I try to specify both like before, it now fails. nunit-console tests1\bin\debug\tests1.dll tests2\bin\debug\tests2.dll /framework=4.0.30319 The error is: Could not load file or assembly 'tests2' or one of its dependencies. The system cannot find the file specified. I've had a look in fuslogvw and it shows tests2 being searched for in the tests1\bin\debug and nunit-console folders. It never searches tests2\bin\debug even though it's specified on the command line. What's up with that?

    Read the article

  • NUnit vs. MsTest: NUnit wins for Unit Testing.

    People are still wondering what are the differences between the two most popular unit testing frameworks in the .NET world: the open source NUnit and the commercial MsTest). Heres a short list of what i remember instantly: Nunit contains a [TestCase] attribute that allows implementing parametrized tests. this does not exist in msTest MsTest's ExpectedException attribute has a bug where the expected message is never really asserted even if it's wrong - the test will pass. Nunit has an...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

  • Do we really need isolation frameworks to create stubs?

    - by Sandbox
    I have read this: http://martinfowler.com/articles/mocksArentStubs.html My concepts about a stub and a mock are clear. I understand the need of isolation frameworks like moq, rhinomocks and like to create a mock object. As mocks, participate in actual verfication of expectations. But why do we need these frameworks to create stubs. I would rather prefer rolling out a hand created stub and use it in various fixtures.

    Read the article

  • Registering NUnit DynamicMock Instances in a UnityContainer

    - by Phil
    I'm somewhat new to Unity and dependency injection. I'm trying to write a unit test that goes something like this: [Test] public void Test() { UnityContainer container = new UnityContainer(); DynamicMock myMock = new DynamicMock(typeof(IMyInterface)); container.RegisterInstance(typeof(IMyInterface), myMock.MockInstance); //Error here // Continue unit test... } When this test executes, the container throws an ArgumentNullException inside the RegisterInstance method with the message Value cannot be null. Parameter name: assignmentValueType. The top line of the stack trace is at Microsoft.Practices.Unity.Utility.Guard.TypeIsAssignable(Type assignmentTargetType, Type assignmentValueType, String argumentName). Why can't I register a MockInstance with the UnityContainer, and how do I work around this?

    Read the article

  • How to access project files from NUnit tests

    - by Daren Thomas
    I have some Tests that I run with ReSharpers "Run All Tests from Solution" feature. One of the classes being tested has a dependency on a file in the same folder as the assembly containing it. This file is copied to the output directory via MSBuild (set "Copy To Output Directory" to "Copy always"). Problem: The tests are not being run from the normal assembly output directory, but instead some temporary location in my user profile. Therefore, I don't really know where to look for the file - the test runner does not copy it there. Can I force it to?

    Read the article

  • How to generate NUnit fixtures programmatically?

    - by pmezard
    Hello, Say I have a test like: void TestSomething(int someParam) { // Test code } I would like to execute this test with a set of "someParam" values. I could write explicit [Test] fixtures calling TestSomething() with the parameters, which means having N methods for every TestSomething() method. I could write another [Test] method looping on "someParam" values and calling TestSomething(), it means 2 methods for every test, and the test report is not as good as with individual TestSomethingWithXValue() methods. So, is there any way to programmatically generate fixtures for every test methods and input values?

    Read the article

  • NUnit doesn't work well with Assert.AreEqual

    - by stasal
    Hi! I'm new to unit-testing and NUit in particular. I'm just typing some examples from the book which refers to Java and JUnit. But I'm using C# instead. The problem is: I've got a class with overriden methods such as Equals() and GetHashCode(), but when I am trying to compare two objects of this class with Assert.AreEqual() my code is not called, so I get an exception. Assert.True(MyClass.Equals(MyClass2)) does work well. But I don't wanna use this construction instead of Assert.AreEqual(). Where the problem can be? Here is the class: public class Money { public int amount; protected string currency; public Money(int amount, string currency) { this.amount = amount; this.currency = currency; } public new bool Equals(object obj) { if (obj == null) return false; Money money = (Money)obj; return (amount == money.amount) && (Currency().Equals(money.Currency())); } public new int GetHashCode() { return (string.Format("{0}{1}", amount, currency)).GetHashCode(); } public static Money Dollar(int amount) { return new Money(amount, "USD"); } public static Money Franc(int amount) { return new Money(amount, "CHF"); } public Money Times(int multiplier) { return new Money(amount * multiplier, currency); } public string Currency() { return currency; } } And the test method itself: [TestFixture] public class DollarTest { [Test] public void TestMultiplication() { Money five = Money.Dollar(5); Assert.True(Money.Dollar(10).Equals(five.Times(2))); // ok Assert.AreEqual(Money.Dollar(10), five.Times(2)); // fails } } Thanks.

    Read the article

  • NUnit: Assert.Throws

    - by epitka
    How do I use Assert.Throws to assert type of the exception and the actual message workding. Something like this: Assert.Throws<Exception>( ()=>user.MakeUserActive()).WithMessage("Actual exception message") Method I am testing throws multiple messages of the same type, with different message and I need a way to test that correct message is thrown depending on the context.

    Read the article

  • NUnit Assert a list of objects in no order

    - by Shawn Mclean
    How do I Assert a collection of items in no particular order? I just want to make sure all the items are in the list. I'm heard of CollectionAssert but I do not see any method that would do what I want. My object looks like this: public class Vector2{ public float X {get; set;} public float Y {get; set;} } Assert - I want something like this: CollectionAssert.ContainsAll(mesh.GetPolygonVertices(0), aListOfVertices); mesh.GetPolygonVertices(int) returns a List<Vector2> and aListOfVertices contains all of what is returned, but not guaranteed that order.

    Read the article

  • How do I simplify these NUNit tests?

    - by Lucas Meijer
    These three tests are identical, except that they use a different static function to create a StartInfo instance. I have this pattern coming up all trough my testcode, and would love to be be able to simplify this using [TestCase], or any other way that reduces boilerplate code. To the best of my knowledge I'm not allowed to use a delegate as a [TestCase] argument, and I'm hoping people here have creative ideas on how to make the code below more terse. [Test] public void ResponseHeadersWorkinPlatform1() { DoResponseHeadersWorkTest(Platform1StartInfo.CreateOneRunning); } [Test] public void ResponseHeadersWorkinPlatform2() { DoResponseHeadersWorkTest(Platform2StartInfo.CreateOneRunning); } [Test] public void ResponseHeadersWorkinPlatform3() { DoResponseHeadersWorkTest(Platform3StartInfo.CreateOneRunning); } void DoResponseHeadersWorkTest(Func<ScriptResource,StartInfo> startInfoCreator) { ScriptResource sr = ScriptResource.Default; var process = startInfoCreator(sr).Start(); //assert some things here }

    Read the article

  • Combining RequiresSTA and Timeout attributes on a test fails

    - by Peter Lillevold
    I have a test that opens and closes a WPF Window and thus requires the STA threading apartment. To safeguard the test against the window staying open (and thus hang the test indefinitely) I wanted to use the Timeout attribute. The problem is that applying the Timeout attribute causes the test to fail on timeout regardless of whether the test works or not. Without the attribute everything works fine. My theory is that Timeout causes the test to be executed on a new thread that does not inherit the STA apartment. Is there another way to have both STA and the timeout safeguard in NUnit? My test looks something like this: [Test, RequiresSTA, Timeout(300)] public void Construct() { var window = new WindowView(); window.Loaded += (sender, args) => window.Close(); var app = new Application(); app.Run(window); try { // ...run system under test } finally { app.Shutdown(); } }

    Read the article

  • How do I get Nunit to run selenium tests against different servers?

    - by Jon
    I have an Nunit test which uses selenium RC to run tests against our UI. I want to run the tests against 2 different servers, which means having the call to selenium.open() with 2 different servers. However, I don't want to have 2 different Nunit test suites that do the same thing but against different servers. I need a way of passing parameters from Nant or the Nunit driver program to specific which server to test against. Is there anyway to do this?

    Read the article

  • How do I explain the importance of NUNIT Test cases to my Colleagues [duplicate]

    - by JNL
    This question already has an answer here: How to explain the value of unit testing 6 answers I am currently working in Software Development for applications including lot of Mathematical Calculations. As a result there are lot of test cases that we need to consider. We donot have any NUNIT Test case system, I am wonderring how should I get the advantages of implementing the NUNIT testing in front of my colleagues and my boss. I am pretty sure, it would be of great help for our team. Any help regarding the same, will be higly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • RhinoMocks Testing callback method

    - by joblot
    Hi All I have a service proxy class that makes asyn call to service operation. I use a callback method to pass results back to my view model. Doing functional testing of view model, I can mock service proxy to ensure methods are called on the proxy, but how can I ensure that callback method is called as well? With RhinoMocks I can test that events are handled and event raise events on the mocked object, but how can I test callbacks? ViewModel: public class MyViewModel { public void GetDataAsync() { // Use DI framework to get the object IMyServiceClient myServiceClient = IoC.Resolve<IMyServiceClient>(); myServiceClient.GetData(GetDataAsyncCallback); } private void GetDataAsyncCallback(Entity entity, ServiceError error) { // do something here... } } ServiceProxy: public class MyService : ClientBase, IMyServiceClient { // Constructor public NertiAdminServiceClient(string endpointConfigurationName, string remoteAddress) : base(endpointConfigurationName, remoteAddress) { } // IMyServiceClient member. public void GetData(Action<Entity, ServiceError> callback) { Channel.BeginGetData(EndGetData, callback); } private void EndGetData(IAsyncResult result) { Action<Entity, ServiceError> callback = result.AsyncState as Action<Entity, ServiceError>; ServiceError error; Entity results = Channel.EndGetData(out error, result); if (callback != null) callback(results, error); } } Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to test if raising an event results in a method being called conditional on value of parameters

    - by MattC
    I'm trying to write a unit test that will raise an event on a mock object which my test class is bound to. What I'm keen to test though is that when my test class gets it's eventhandler called it should only call a method on certain values of the eventhandlers parameters. My test seems to pass even if I comment the code that calls ProcessPriceUpdate(price); I'm in VS2005 so no lambdas please :( So... public delegate void PriceUpdateEventHandler(decimal price); public interface IPriceInterface{ event PriceUpdateEventHandler PriceUpdate; } public class TestClass { IPriceInterface priceInterface = null; TestClass(IPriceInterface priceInterface) { this.priceInterface = priceInterface; } public void Init() { priceInterface.PriceUpdate += OnPriceUpdate; } public void OnPriceUpdate(decimal price) { if(price > 0) ProcessPriceUpdate(price); } public void ProcessPriceUpdate(decimal price) { //do something with price } } And my test so far :s public void PriceUpdateEvent() { MockRepository mock = new MockRepository(); IPriceInterface pi = mock.DynamicMock<IPriceInterface>(); TestClass test = new TestClass(pi); decimal prc = 1M; IEventRaiser raiser; using (mock.Record()) { pi.PriceUpdate += null; raiser = LastCall.IgnoreArguments().GetEventRaiser(); Expect.Call(delegate { test.ProcessPriceUpdate(prc); }).Repeat.Once(); } using (mock.Playback()) { test.Init(); raiser.Raise(prc); } }

    Read the article

  • Verify an event was raised by mocked object

    - by joblot
    In my unit test how can I verify that an event is raised by the mocked object. I have a View(UI) -- ViewModel -- DataProvider -- ServiceProxy. ServiceProxy makes async call to serivce operation. When async operation is complete a method on DataProvider is called (callback method is passed as a method parameter). The callback method then raise and event which ViewModel is listening to. For ViewModel test I mock DataProvider and verify that handler exists for event raised by DataProvider. When testing DataProvider I mock ServiceProxy, but how can I test that callback method is called and event is raised. I am using RhinoMock 3.5 and AAA syntax Thanks -- DataProvider -- public partial class DataProvider { public event EventHandler<EntityEventArgs<ProductDefinition>> GetProductDefinitionCompleted; public void GetProductDefinition() { var service = IoC.Resolve<IServiceProxy>(); service.GetProductDefinitionAsync(GetProductDefinitionAsyncCallback); } private void GetProductDefinitionAsyncCallback(ProductDefinition productDefinition, ServiceError error) { OnGetProductDefinitionCompleted(this, new EntityEventArgs<ProductDefinition>(productDefinition, error)); } protected void OnGetProductDefinitionCompleted(object sender, EntityEventArgs<ProductDefinition> e) { if (GetProductDefinitionCompleted != null) GetProductDefinitionCompleted(sender, e); } } -- ServiceProxy -- public class ServiceProxy : ClientBase<IService>, IServiceProxy { public void GetProductDefinitionAsync(Action<ProductDefinition, ServiceError> callback) { Channel.BeginGetProductDefinition(EndGetProductDefinition, callback); } private void EndGetProductDefinition(IAsyncResult result) { Action<ProductDefinition, ServiceError> callback = result.AsyncState as Action<ProductDefinition, ServiceError>; ServiceError error; ProductDefinition results = Channel.EndGetProductDefinition(out error, result); if (callback != null) callback(results, error); } }

    Read the article

  • What is the best unit test framework for .NET and why?

    - by rmx
    It seems to me that everyone uses NUnit without even considering the other options. I think this is because: Everyone is familiar with it already so they won't have to learn a new API. It is already set up with their continuous integration server to work with NUnit. Am I wrong about this? I decided to use xUnit on one of my own projects recently and I love it! It makes so much more sense to me and conceptually it seems like a definite step forward from NUnit. I'd like to hear opinions on which framework is actually the best - not taking into consideration having to learn it or reconfigure your automated testing.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >