Search Results

Search found 13452 results on 539 pages for 'django testing'.

Page 67/539 | < Previous Page | 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74  | Next Page >

• ASP.NET MVC unit testing

  - by Simon Lomax

  Hi, I'm getting started with unit testing and trying to do some TDD. I've read a fair bit about the subject and written a few tests. I just want to know if the following is the right approach. I want to add the usual "contact us" facility on my web site. You know the thing, the user fills out a form with their email address, enters a brief message and hits a button to post the form back. The model binders do their stuff and my action method accepts the posted data as a model. The action method would then parse the model and use smtp to send an email to the web site administrator infoming him/her that somebody filled out the contact form on their site. Now for the question .... In order to test this, would I be right in creating an interface IDeliver that has a method Send(emailAddress, message) to accept the email address and message body. Implement the inteface in a concrete class and let that class deal with smtp stuff and actually send the mail. If I add the inteface as a parameter to my controller constructor I can then use DI and IoC to inject the concrete class into the controller. But when unit testing I can create a fake or mock version of my IDeliver and do assertions on that. The reason I ask is that I've seen other examples of people generating interfaces for SmtpClient and then mocking that. Is there really any need to go that far or am I not understanding this stuff?

  Read the article

• Automatic testing of GUI related private methods

  - by Stein G. Strindhaug

  When it comes to GUI programming (at least for web) I feel that often the only thing that would be useful to unit test is some of the private methods*. While unit testing makes perfect sense for back-end code, I feel it doesn't quite fit the GUI classes. What is the best way to add automatic testing of these? * Why I think the only methods useful to test is private: Often when I write GUI classes they don't even have any public methods except for the constructor. The public methods if any is trivial, and the constructor does most of the job calling private methods. They receive some data from server does a lot of trivial output and feeds data to the constructor of other classes contained inside it, adding listeners that calls a (more or less directly) calls the server... Most of it pretty trivial (the hardest part is the layout: css, IE, etc.) but sometimes I create some private method that does some advanced tricks, which I definitely do not want to be publicly visible (because it's closely coupled to the implementation of the layout, and likely to change), but is sufficiently complicated to break. These are often only called by the constructor or repeatedly by events in the code, not by any public methods at all. I'd like to have a way to test this type of methods, without making it public or resorting to reflection trickery. (BTW: I'm currently using GWT, but I feel this applies to most languages/frameworks I've used when coding for GUI)

  Read the article

• Testing subpackage modules in Python 3

  - by Mitchell Model

  I have been experimenting with various uses of hierarchies like this and the differences between absolute and relative imports, and can't figure out how to do routine things with the package, subpackages, and modules without simply putting everything on sys.path. I have a two-level package hierarchy: MyApp __init__.py Application __init__.py Module1 Module2 ... Domain __init__.py Module1 Module2 ... UI __init__.py Module1 Module2 ... I want to be able to do the following: Run test code in a Module's "if main" when the module imports from other modules in the same directory. Have one or more test code modules in each subpackage that runs unit tests on the modules in the subpackage. Have a set of unit tests that reside in someplace reasonable, but outside the subpackages, either in a sibling package, at the top-level package, or outside the top-level package (though all these might end up doing is running the tests in each subpackage) "Enter" the structure from any of the three subpackage levels, e.g. run code that just uses Domain modules, run code that just uses Application modules, but Application uses code from both Application and Domain modules, and run code from GUI uses code from both GUI and Application; for instance, Application test code would import Application modules but not Domain modules. After developing the bulk of the code without subpackages, continue developing and testing after organizing the modules into this hierarchy. I know how to use relative imports so that external code that puts MyApp on its sys.path can import MyApp, import any subpackages it wants, and import things from their modules, while the modules in each subpackage can import other modules from the same subpackage or from sibling packages. However, the development needs listed above seem incompatible with subpackage structuring -- in other words, I can't have it both ways: a well-structured multi-level package hierarchy used from the outside and also used from within, in particular for testing but also because modules from one design level (in particular the UI) should not import modules from a design level below the next one down. Sorry for the long essay, but I think it fairly represents the struggles a lot of people have been having adopting to the new relative import mechanisms.

  Read the article

• Unit testing with Mocks. Test behaviour not implementation

  - by Kenny Eliasson

  Hi.. I always had a problem when unit testing classes that calls other classes, for example I have a class that creates a new user from a phone-number then saves it to the database and sends a SMS to the number provided. Like the code provided below. public class UserRegistrationProcess : IUserRegistration { private readonly IRepository _repository; private readonly ISmsService _smsService; public UserRegistrationProcess(IRepository repository, ISmsService smsService) { _repository = repository; _smsService = smsService; } public void Register(string phone) { var user = new User(phone); _repository.Save(user); _smsService.Send(phone, "Welcome", "Message!"); } } It is a really simple class but how would you go about and test it? At the moment im using Mocks but I dont really like it [Test] public void WhenRegistreringANewUser_TheNewUserIsSavedToTheDatabase() { var repository = new Mock<IRepository>(); var smsService = new Mock<ISmsService>(); var userRegistration = new UserRegistrationProcess(repository.Object, smsService.Object); var phone = "0768524440"; userRegistration.Register(phone); repository.Verify(x => x.Save(It.Is<User>(user => user.Phone == phone)), Times.Once()); } [Test] public void WhenRegistreringANewUser_ItWillSendANewSms() { var repository = new Mock<IRepository>(); var smsService = new Mock<ISmsService>(); var userRegistration = new UserRegistrationProcess(repository.Object, smsService.Object); var phone = "0768524440"; userRegistration.Register(phone); smsService.Verify(x => x.Send(phone, It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>()), Times.Once()); } It feels like I am testing the wrong thing here? Any thoughts on how to make this better?

  Read the article

• Unit Testing-- fundamental goal?

  - by David

  Me and my co-workers had a bit of a disagreement last night about unit testing in our PHP/MySQL application. Half of us argued that when unit testing a function within a class, you should mock everything outside of that class and its parents. The other half of us argued that you SHOULDN'T mock anything that is a direct dependancy of the class either. The specific example was our logging mechanism, which happened through a static Logging class, and we had a number of Logging::log() calls in various locations throughout our application. The first half of us said the Logging mechanism should be faked (mocked) because it would be tested in the Logging unit tests. The second half of us argued that we should include the original Logging class in our unit test so that if we make a change to our logging interface, we'll be able to see if it creates problems in other parts of the application due to failing to update the call interface. So I guess the fundamental question is-- do unit tests serve to test the functionality of a single unit in a closed environment, or show the consequences of changes to a single unit in a larger environment? If it's one of these, how do you accomplish the other?

  Read the article

• Unit Testing Private Method in Resource Managing Class (C++)

  - by BillyONeal

  I previously asked this question under another name but deleted it because I didn't explain it very well. Let's say I have a class which manages a file. Let's say that this class treats the file as having a specific file format, and contains methods to perform operations on this file: class Foo { std::wstring fileName_; public: Foo(const std::wstring& fileName) : fileName_(fileName) { //Construct a Foo here. }; int getChecksum() { //Open the file and read some part of it //Long method to figure out what checksum it is. //Return the checksum. } }; Let's say I'd like to be able to unit test the part of this class that calculates the checksum. Unit testing the parts of the class that load in the file and such is impractical, because to test every part of the getChecksum() method I might need to construct 40 or 50 files! Now lets say I'd like to reuse the checksum method elsewhere in the class. I extract the method so that it now looks like this: class Foo { std::wstring fileName_; static int calculateChecksum(const std::vector<unsigned char> &fileBytes) { //Long method to figure out what checksum it is. } public: Foo(const std::wstring& fileName) : fileName_(fileName) { //Construct a Foo here. }; int getChecksum() { //Open the file and read some part of it return calculateChecksum( something ); } void modifyThisFileSomehow() { //Perform modification int newChecksum = calculateChecksum( something ); //Apply the newChecksum to the file } }; Now I'd like to unit test the calculateChecksum() method because it's easy to test and complicated, and I don't care about unit testing getChecksum() because it's simple and very difficult to test. But I can't test calculateChecksum() directly because it is private. Does anyone know of a solution to this problem?

  Read the article

• What is the purpose of unit testing an interface repository

  - by ahsteele

  I am unit testing an ICustomerRepository interface used for retrieving objects of type Customer. As a unit test what value am I gaining by testing the ICustomerRepository in this manner? Under what conditions would the below test fail? For tests of this nature is it advisable to do tests that I know should fail? i.e. look for id 4 when I know I've only placed 5 in the repository I am probably missing something obvious but it seems the integration tests of the class that implements ICustomerRepository will be of more value. [TestClass] public class CustomerTests : TestClassBase { private Customer SetUpCustomerForRepository() { return new Customer() { CustId = 5, DifId = "55", CustLookupName = "The Dude", LoginList = new[] { new Login { LoginCustId = 5, LoginName = "tdude" }, new Login { LoginCustId = 5, LoginName = "tdude2" } } }; } [TestMethod] public void CanGetCustomerById() { // arrange var customer = SetUpCustomerForRepository(); var repository = Stub<ICustomerRepository>(); // act repository.Stub(rep => rep.GetById(5)).Return(customer); // assert Assert.AreEqual(customer, repository.GetById(5)); } } Test Base Class public class TestClassBase { protected T Stub<T>() where T : class { return MockRepository.GenerateStub<T>(); } } ICustomerRepository and IRepository public interface ICustomerRepository : IRepository<Customer> { IList<Customer> FindCustomers(string q); Customer GetCustomerByDifID(string difId); Customer GetCustomerByLogin(string loginName); } public interface IRepository<T> { void Save(T entity); void Save(List<T> entity); bool Save(T entity, out string message); void Delete(T entity); T GetById(int id); ICollection<T> FindAll(); }

  Read the article

• Framework or tool for "distributed unit testing"?

  - by user262646

  Is there any tool or framework able to make it easier to test distributed software written in Java? My system under test is a peer-to-peer software, and I'd like to perform testing using something like PNUnit, but with Java instead of .Net. The system under test is a framework I'm developing to build P2P applications. It uses JXTA as a lower subsystem, trying to hide some complexities of it. It's currently an academic project, so I'm pursuing simplicity at this moment. In my test, I want to demonstrate that a peer (running in its own process, possibly with multiple threads) can discover another one (running in another process or even another machine) and that they can exchange a few messages. I'm not using mocks nor stubs because I need to see both sides working simultaneously. I realize that some kind of coordination mechanism is needed, and PNUnit seems to be able to do that. I've bumped into some initiatives like Pisces, which "aims to provide a distributed testing environment that extends JUnit, giving the developer/tester an ability to run remote JUnits and create complex test suites that are composed of several remote JUnit tests running in parallel or serially", but this project and a few others I have found seem to be long dead.

  Read the article

• Best practice for debug Asserts during Unit testing

  - by Steve Steiner

  Does heavy use of unit tests discourage the use of debug asserts? It seems like a debug assert firing in the code under test implies the unit test shouldn't exist or the debug assert shouldn't exist. "There can be only one" seems like a reasonable principle. Is this the common practice? Or do you disable your debug asserts when unit testing, so they can be around for integration testing? Edit: I updated 'Assert' to debug assert to distinguish an assert in the code under test from the lines in the unit test that check state after the test has run. Also here is an example that I believe shows the dilema: A unit test passes invalid inputs for a protected function that asserts it's inputs are valid. Should the unit test not exist? It's not a public function. Perhaps checking the inputs would kill perf? Or should the assert not exist? The function is protected not private so it should be checking it's inputs for safety.

  Read the article

• Unit Testing - Algorithm or Sample based ?

  - by ohadsc

  Say I'm trying to test a simple Set class public IntSet : IEnumerable<int> { Add(int i) {...} //IEnumerable implementation... } And suppose I'm trying to test that no duplicate values can exist in the set. My first option is to insert some sample data into the set, and test for duplicates using my knowledge of the data I used, for example: //OPTION 1 void InsertDuplicateValues_OnlyOneInstancePerValueShouldBeInTheSet() { var set = new IntSet(); //3 will be added 3 times var values = new List<int> {1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5}; foreach (int i in values) set.Add(i); //I know 3 is the only candidate to appear multiple times int counter = 0; foreach (int i in set) if (i == 3) counter++; Assert.AreEqual(1, counter); } My second option is to test for my condition generically: //OPTION 2 void InsertDuplicateValues_OnlyOneInstancePerValueShouldBeInTheSet() { var set = new IntSet(); //The following could even be a list of random numbers with a duplicate var values = new List<int> { 1, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5}; foreach (int i in values) set.Add(i); //I am not using my prior knowledge of the sample data //the following line would work for any data CollectionAssert.AreEquivalent(new HashSet<int>(values), set); } Of course, in this example, I conveniently have a set implementation to check against, as well as code to compare collections (CollectionAssert). But what if I didn't have either ? This is the situation when you are testing your real life custom business logic. Granted, testing for expected conditions generically covers more cases - but it becomes very similar to implementing the logic again (which is both tedious and useless - you can't use the same code to check itself!). Basically I'm asking whether my tests should look like "insert 1, 2, 3 then check something about 3" or "insert 1, 2, 3 and check for something in general" EDIT - To help me understand, please state in your answer if you prefer OPTION 1 or OPTION 2 (or neither, or that it depends on the case, etc )

  Read the article

• C++ and Dependency Injection in unit testing

  - by lhumongous

  Suppose I have a C++ class like so: class A { public: A() { } void SetNewB( const B& _b ) { m_B = _b; } private: B m_B; } In order to unit test something like this, I would have to break A's dependency on B. Since class A holds onto an actual object and not a pointer, I would have to refactor this code to take a pointer. Additionally, I would need to create a parent interface class for B so I can pass in my own fake of B when I test SetNewB. In this case, doesn't unit testing with dependency injection further complicate the existing code? If I make B a pointer, I'm now introducing heap allocation, and some piece of code is now responsible for cleaning it up (unless I use ref counted pointers). Additionally, if B is a rather trivial class with only a couple of member variables and functions, why introduce a whole new interface for it instead of just testing with an instance of B? I suppose you could make the argument that it would be easier to refactor A by using an interface. But are there some cases where two classes might need to be tightly coupled?

  Read the article

• Unit testing a 'legacy' WPF Application

  - by sc_ray

  The product I have been working on has been in development for the past six years. It started as a generic data entry portal into an insanely complex part WPF/part legacy application. The system has been developed for all these years without a single Unit test in its fold. Now, the point has been raised for a comprehensive unit testing framework. I have been recruited recently to work on this product and have been tasked to get the 'Testing' in order. Since the team that worked on the product for the last six years adopted 'Agile', the project lacks any documentation of the business rules or any design documents. I have been trying to write unit tests for some of the modules. But I am not sure what to Mock, how to setup my Test fixture and eventually what to Test for, since a casual glance of the methods does not reveal its intentions. Also, it has come to my attention that the code was not developed with a particular methodology in mind. Given the situation, I was wondering if the good people of Stackoverflow could provide me with some advise on how to salvage this situation. I have heard about the book 'Working with Legacy Code' that has something to say about this general situation but I was thinking about getting some pointers from individuals who have encountered similar situations within the technology stack(C#,VB,C++,.NET 3.5,WCF,SQL Server 2005).

  Read the article

• Integration testing - can it be done right?

  - by Max

  I used TDD as a development style on some projects in the past two years, but I always get stuck on the same point: how can I test the integration of the various parts of my program? What I am currently doing is writing a testcase per class (this is my rule of thumb: a "unit" is a class, and each class has one or more testcases). I try to resolve dependencies by using mocks and stubs and this works really well as each class can be tested independently. After some coding, all important classes are tested. I then "wire" them together using an IoC container. And here I am stuck: How to test if the wiring was successfull and the objects interact the way I want? An example: Think of a web application. There is a controller class which takes an array of ids, uses a repository to fetch the records based on these ids and then iterates over the records and writes them as a string to an outfile. To make it simple, there would be three classes: Controller, Repository, OutfileWriter. Each of them is tested in isolation. What I would do in order to test the "real" application: making the http request (either manually or automated) with some ids from the database and then look in the filesystem if the file was written. Of course this process could be automated, but still: doesn´t that duplicate the test-logic? Is this what is called an "integration test"? In a book i recently read about Unit Testing it seemed to me that integration testing was more of an anti-pattern?

  Read the article

• How to solve 404 for static files with Django and Nginx?

  - by Lucio

  I setup a Trusty VM with Django + Nginx (other stuffs too). The server is working, I get the "Welcome to Django" page. But when I enter to servername/admin it loads the HTML page but fails to load the static content. And the admin page have this links to static content: <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/static/admin/css/base.css" /> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="/static/admin/css/login.css" /> Both of the CSS files give me 404, as the Nginx log shows: 192.168.56.1 - - [05/Jun/2014:12:04:09 -0300] "GET /admin HTTP/1.1" 301 5 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/29.0" 192.168.56.1 - - [05/Jun/2014:12:04:09 -0300] "GET /admin/ HTTP/1.1" 200 833 "-" "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/29.0" 192.168.56.1 - - [05/Jun/2014:12:04:10 -0300] "GET /static/admin/css/base.css HTTP/1.1" 404 142 "http://ubuntu-server/admin/" "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/29.0" 192.168.56.1 - - [05/Jun/2014:12:04:10 -0300] "GET /static/admin/css/login.css HTTP/1.1" 404 142 "http://ubuntu-server/admin/" "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/29.0" I think that the error is on my nginx.conf file, but do not know how to solve it.

  Read the article

• Trouble getting SSL to work with django + nginx + wsgi

  - by Kevin

  I've followed a couple of examples for Django + nginx + wsgi + ssl, but I can't get them to work. I simply get an error in my browser than I can't connect. I'm running two websites off the host. The config files are identical except for the ip addresses, server names, and directories. When neither use SSL, they work fine. When I try to listen on 443 with one of them, I can't connect to either. My config files are below, and any suggestions would be appreciated. server{ listen xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:80; server_name sub.domain.com; access_log /home/django/logs/nginx_customerdb_http_access.log; error_log /home/django/logs/nginx_customerdb_http_error.log; location / { proxy_pass http://127.0.0.1:8080; proxy_redirect off; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; client_max_body_size 10m; client_body_buffer_size 128k; proxy_connect_timeout 90; proxy_send_timeout 90; proxy_read_timeout 90; proxy_buffers 32 4k; } location /site_media/ { alias /home/django/customerdb_site_media/; } location /admin-media/ { alias /home/django/django_admin_media/; } } server{ listen xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:443; server_name sub.domain.com; access_log /home/django/logs/nginx_customerdb_http_access.log; error_log /home/django/logs/nginx_customerdb_http_error.log; ssl on; ssl_certificate sub.domain.com.crt; ssl_certificate_key sub.domain.com.key; ssl_prefer_server_ciphers on; location / { proxy_pass http://127.0.0.1:8080; proxy_redirect off; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-Protocol https; client_max_body_size 10m; client_body_buffer_size 128k; proxy_connect_timeout 90; proxy_send_timeout 90; proxy_read_timeout 90; proxy_buffers 32 4k; } location /site_media/ { alias /home/django/customerdb_site_media/; } location /admin-media/ { alias /home/django/django_admin_media/; } } <VirtualHost *:8080> ServerName xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx ServerAlias xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx LogLevel warn ErrorLog /home/django/logs/apache_customerdb_error.log CustomLog /home/django/logs/apache_customerdb_access.log combined WSGIScriptAlias / /home/django/customerdb/apache/django.wsgi WSGIDaemonProcess customerdb_wsgi processes=4 threads=5 WSGIProcessGroup customerdb_wsgi SetEnvIf X-Forwarded-Protocol "^https$" HTTPS=on </VirtualHost> UDPATE: the existence of two sites (on separate IPs) on the host is the issue. if i delete the other site, the setting above mostly work. doing so also brings up another issue: chrome doesn't accept the site as secure saying that some content is not encrypted.

  Read the article

• Django | Apache | Deploy website behind SSL

  - by planet260

  So here are my requirements. I have a website built in Django. I deployed it on Apache Ubuntu. Before there was no SSL involved so the deployment was pretty simple. But now the requirements are changed. Now I have to take a few actions like signup and login behind SSL and present the admin panel and other normally via HTTP. By following the this tutorial I have set-up Apache and SSL and generated certificates for SSL communication. But I am not sure how to proceed, ie. how to serve only a few of my actions through SSL. Below is my configuration. The normal actions are working fine but I don't know how to configure SSL calls. WSGIScriptAlias / /home/ubuntu/myproject/src/myproject/wsgi.py WSGIPythonPath /home/ubuntu/myproject/src <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName mydomain.com <Directory /home/ubuntu/myproject/src/myproject> <Files wsgi.py> order deny,allow Allow from all </Files> </Directory> Alias /static/admin/ "/home/ubuntu/myproject/src/static/admin/" <Directory "/home/ubuntu/myproject/src/static/admin/"> Order allow,deny Options Indexes Allow from all IndexOptions FancyIndexing </Directory> <Location "/login"> RewriteEngine on RewriteRule /admin(.*)$ https://mydomain.com/login$1 [L,R=301] </Location> </VirtualHost> <VirtualHost *:443> ServerName mydomain.com SSLEngine on SSLOptions +StrictRequire SSLCertificateFile /etc/apache2/ssl/apache.crt SSLCertificateKeyFile /etc/apache2/ssl/apache.key <Directory /home/ubuntu/myproject/src/myproject> <Files wsgi.py> order deny,allow Allow from all </Files> </Directory> Alias /static/admin/ "/home/ubuntu/myproject/src/static/admin/" <Directory "/home/ubuntu/myproject/src/static/admin/"> Order allow,deny Options Indexes Allow from all IndexOptions FancyIndexing </Directory> </VirtualHost> Can you please help me out on how to achieve this? What am I doing wrong? I have read a lot of tutorials but honestly I am not really good at configurations. Any help is appreciated.

  Read the article

• Unit testing ASP.NET MVC 2 routes with areas bails out on AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas()

  - by Sandor Drieënhuizen

  I'm unit testing my routes in ASP.NET MVC 2. I'm using MSTest and I'm using areas as well. When I call AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas() however, it throws this exception: System.InvalidOperationException: System.InvalidOperationException: This method cannot be called during the application's pre-start initialization stage.. OK, so I reckon I can't call it from my class initializer. But when can I call it? I don't have an Application_Start in my test obviously.

  Read the article

• Software Testing Tools - for java

  - by Joao Guilherme

  Can someone list me 5 good softwares for "Software Testing" in java projects? I need to study 5 of them, what do you recommend?

  Read the article

• Can't get python.manage.py syncdb to work

  - by Diego

  I just created my first django app, initialized variables DATABASE_ENGINE and DATABASE_NAME in settings.py, but now when I run python manage.py syncdb, I get the following error Can somebody help? Does this have to do with having two python versions installed? I'm a django/python noob, please help. thanks!! my-computer:~/Django-1.1.1 mycomp$ python manage.py syncdb /Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.6/Resources/Python.app/Contents/MacOS/Python: can't open file 'manage.py': [Errno 2] No such file or directory my-computer:~/Django-1.1.1 mycomp$ export PATH=/Users/mycomp/bin:$PATH

  Read the article

• Unit testing in Web2py

  - by Wraith

  I'm following the instructions from this post but cannot get my methods recognized globally. The error message: ERROR: test_suggest_performer (__builtin__.TestSearch) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "applications/myapp/tests/test_search.py", line 24, in test_suggest_performer suggs = suggest_flavors("straw") NameError: global name 'suggest_flavors' is not defined My test file: import unittest from gluon.globals import Request db = test_db execfile("applications/myapp/controllers/search.py", globals()) class TestSearch(unittest.TestCase): def setUp(self): request = Request() def test_suggest_flavors(self): suggs = suggest_flavors("straw") self.assertEqual(len(suggs), 1) self.assertEqual(suggs[0][1], 'Strawberry') My controller: def suggest_flavors(term): return [] Has anyone successfully completed unit testing like this in web2py?

  Read the article

• Unit and Functional testing iPhone code?

  - by Brian Genisio

  I just sat in on a seminar about developing apps for the iPhone. The speaker told me that there is NOTHING available for writing unit tests or functional tests for your iPhone software. Is this true? Is there really no testing story for the iPhone as of now?

  Read the article

• How to serve static files for multiple Django projects via nginx to same domain

  - by thanley

  I am trying to setup my nginx conf so that I can serve the relevant files for my multiple Django projects. Ultimately I want each app to be available at www.example.com/app1, www.example.com/app2 etc. They all serve static files from a 'static-files' directory located in their respective project root. The project structure: Home Ubuntu Web www.example.com ref logs app app1 app1 static bower_components templatetags app1_project templates static-files app2 app2 static templates templatetags app2_project static-files app3 tests templates static-files static app3_project app3 venv When I use the conf below, there are no problems for serving the static-files for the app that I designate in the /static/ location. I can also access the different apps found at their locations. However, I cannot figure out how to serve all of the static files for all the apps at the same time. I have looked into using the 'try_files' command for the static location, but cannot figure out how to see if it is working or not. Nginx Conf - Only serving static files for one app: server { listen 80; server_name example.com; server_name www.example.com; access_log /home/ubuntu/web/www.example.com/logs/access.log; error_log /home/ubuntu/web/www.example.com/logs/error.log; root /home/ubuntu/web/www.example.com/; location /static/ { alias /home/ubuntu/web/www.example.com/app/app1/static-files/; } location /media/ { alias /home/ubuntu/web/www.example.com/media/; } location /app1/ { include uwsgi_params; uwsgi_param SCRIPT_NAME /app1; uwsgi_modifier1 30; uwsgi_pass unix:///home/ubuntu/web/www.example.com/app1.sock; } location /app2/ { include uwsgi_params; uwsgi_param SCRIPT_NAME /app2; uwsgi_modifier1 30; uwsgi_pass unix:///home/ubuntu/web/www.example.com/app2.sock; } location /app3/ { include uwsgi_params; uwsgi_param SCRIPT_NAME /app3; uwsgi_modifier1 30; uwsgi_pass unix:///home/ubuntu/web/www.example.com/app3.sock; } # what to serve if upstream is not available or crashes error_page 400 /static/400.html; error_page 403 /static/403.html; error_page 404 /static/404.html; error_page 500 502 503 504 /static/500.html; # Compression gzip on; gzip_http_version 1.0; gzip_comp_level 5; gzip_proxied any; gzip_min_length 1100; gzip_buffers 16 8k; gzip_types text/plain text/css application/x-javascript text/xml application/xml application/xml+rss text/javascript; # Some version of IE 6 don't handle compression well on some mime-types, # so just disable for them gzip_disable "MSIE [1-6].(?!.*SV1)"; # Set a vary header so downstream proxies don't send cached gzipped # content to IE6 gzip_vary on; } Essentially I want to have something like (I know this won't work) location /static/ { alias /home/ubuntu/web/www.example.com/app/app1/static-files/; alias /home/ubuntu/web/www.example.com/app/app2/static-files/; alias /home/ubuntu/web/www.example.com/app/app3/static-files/; } or (where it can serve the static files based on the uri) location /static/ { try_files $uri $uri/ =404; } So basically, if I use try_files like above, is the problem in my project directory structure? Or am I totally off base on this and I need to put each app in a subdomain instead of going this route? Thanks for any suggestions TLDR: I want to go to: www.example.com/APP_NAME_HERE And have nginx serve the static location: /home/ubuntu/web/www.example.com/app/APP_NAME_HERE/static-files/;

  Read the article

• load testing of "cookieless Session" asp.net

  - by anshu

  I have been trying using MS VSTS 2008, no luck so far.. After the redirection from server to accomodate the sessionID in URL, the test fails during the first time recording. I am open to looking at other tools which are not very expensive. Does anyone have any experience using any tool for testing cookieless sessionID website?

  Read the article

• Looking for a good example usage of get_or _create in Django views and raising a Form error

  - by Rik Wade

  I am looking for a good example of how to achieve the following: I would like to use get_or_create to check whether an object already exists in my database. If it does not, then it will be created. If it does exist, then I will not create the new object, but need to raise a form error to inform the user that they need to enter different data (for example, a different username). The view contains: p, created = Person.objects.get_or_create( email = registration_form.cleaned_data['email'], defaults = { 'creationDate': datetime.datetime.now(), 'dateOfBirth': datetime.date(1970,1,1) }) So 'p' will contain the existing Person if it exists, or the new Person if not. I would like to act on the boolean value in 'created' in order to skip over saving the Person and re-display the registration_form and raise an appropriate form validation error. The alternative I'm considering is doing a check in a custom Form validation method to see whether a Person exists with the data in the provided 'email' field, and just raising a validation error.

  Read the article

• Django QuerySet API: How do I join iexact and icontains?

  - by Zeynel

  Hello, I have this join: lawyers = Lawyer.objects.filter(last__iexact=last_name).filter(first__icontains=first_name) This is the site If you try Last Name: Abbas and First Name: Amr it tells you that amr abbas has 1 schoolmates. But if you try First name only it says that there are no lawyers in the database called amr (obviously there is). If I change (last__iexact=last_name) to (last__icontains=last_name) then leaving Last Name blank works fine and amr is found. But with last__icontains=last_name if you search for "collin" you also get "collins" and "collingwood" which is not what I want. Do you know how I can use iexact and also have it ignored if it is blank? Thanks This is the view function: def search_form(request): if request.method == 'POST': search_form = SearchForm(request.POST) if search_form.is_valid(): last_name = search_form.cleaned_data['last_name'] first_name = search_form.cleaned_data['first_name'] lawyers = Lawyer.objects.filter(last__iexact=last_name).filter(first__icontains=first_name) if len(lawyers)==0: form = SearchForm() return render_to_response('not_in_database.html', {'last': last_name, 'first': first_name, 'form': form}) if len(lawyers)>1: form = SearchForm(initial={'last_name': last_name}) return render_to_response('more_than_1_match.html', {'lawyers': lawyers, 'last': last_name, 'first': first_name, 'form': form}) q_school = Lawyer.objects.filter(last__icontains=last_name).filter(first__icontains=first_name).values_list('school', flat=True) q_year = Lawyer.objects.filter(last__icontains=last_name).filter(first__icontains=first_name).values_list('year_graduated', flat=True) lawyers1 = Lawyer.objects.filter(school__iexact=q_school[0]).filter(year_graduated__icontains=q_year[0]).exclude(last__icontains=last_name) form = SearchForm() return render_to_response('search_results.html', {'lawyers': lawyers1, 'last': last_name, 'first': first_name, 'form': form}) else: form = SearchForm() return render_to_response('search_form.html', {'form': form, })

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74  | Next Page >