Search Results

Search found 2356 results on 95 pages for 'andrew mock'.

Page 71/95 | < Previous Page | 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78  | Next Page >

  • Autofac Unit Testing using RegisterControllers()

    - by Kane
    I am having problems using Autofac 2.1.13 and writing my unit tests for my ASP.NET MV2 application. I can't seem to resolve controllers when using the RegisterControllers method. I have tried using the Resolve<() and ControllerBuilder.Current.GetControllerFactory().CreateController() methods but to no avail. I am sure that I've missed something simple here so can anyone assist? This was my first attempt at resolving the HomeController - but does not work. ContainerBuilder builder = new ContainerBuilder(); builder.RegisterControllers(typeof(HomeController).Assembly); IContainer container = builder.Build(); // Throws a Throws a A first chance exception of type 'Autofac.Core.Registration.ComponentNotRegisteredException' occurred in Autofac.dll var homeController = container.Resolve<HomeController>(); Similarly this does not work either. ContainerBuilder builder = new ContainerBuilder(); builder.RegisterControllers(typeof(HomeController).Assembly); IContainer container = builder.Build(); var containerProvider = new ContainerProvider(container); ControllerBuilder.Current.SetControllerFactory(new AutofacControllerFactory(containerProvider)); var request = new Mock<HttpRequestBase>(MockBehavior.Loose); request.Setup(r => r.Path).Returns("Path"); var httpContext = new Mock<HttpContextBase>(MockBehavior.Loose); httpContext.SetupGet(c => c.Request).Returns(request.Object); ControllerBuilder.Current.GetControllerFactory().CreateController(new RequestContext(httpContext.Object, new RouteData()), "home"); Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. I should note if I register my controllers without using the RegisterControllers() method my unit tests work. My question would seem to be limited to specifically using the RegisterControllers() method.

    Read the article

  • Is HttpContextWrapper all that....useful?

    - by bakasan
    I've been going through the process of cleaning up our controller code to make each action as testable. Generally speaking, this hasn't been too difficult--where we have opportunity to use a fixed object, like say FormsAuthentication, we generally introduce some form of wrapper as appropriate and be on our merry way. For reasons not particularly germaine to this conversation, when it came to dealing with usage of HttpContext, we decided to use the newly created HttpContextWrapper class rather than inventing something homegrown. One thing we did introduce was the ability to swap in a HttpContextWrapper (like say, for unit testing). This was wholly inspired by the way Oren Eini handles unit testing with DateTimes (see article, a pattern we also use) public static class FooHttpContext { public static Func<HttpContextWrapper> Current = () => new HttpContextWrapper(HttpContext.Current); public static void Reset() { Current = () => new HttpContextWrapper(HttpContext.Current); } } Nothing particularly fancy. And it works just fine in our controller code. The kicker came when we go to write unit tests. We're using Moq as our mocking framework, but alas var context = new Mock<HttpContextWrapper>() breaks since HttpContextWrapper doesn't have a parameterless ctor. And what does it take as a ctor parameter? A HttpContext object. So I find myself in a catch 22. I'm using the prescribed way to decouple HttpContext--but I can't mock a value in because the original HttpContext object was sealed and therefore difficult to test. I can map HttpContextBase, which both derive from--but that doesn't really get me what I'm after. Am I just missing the point somewhere with regard to HttpContextWrapper? I can find ways to work around the issue, but we are kind of fond of remaining consistent in decoupling using the Function delegate pattern--but it seems like we're not fully grokking intent of the wrapper.

    Read the article

  • Moq: Unable to cast to interface

    - by Pickels
    Hello, earlier today I asked this question. So since moq creates it's own class from an interface I wasn't able to cast it to a different class. So it got me wondering what if I created a ICustomPrincipal and tried to cast to that. This is how my mocks look: var MockHttpContext = new Mock<HttpContextBase>(); var MockPrincipal = new Mock<ICustomPrincipal>(); MockHttpContext.SetupGet(h => h.User).Returns(MockPrincipal.Object); In the method I am trying to test the follow code gives the error(again): var user = (ICustomPrincipal)httpContext.User; The error is the following: Unable to cast object of type 'IPrincipalProxy4081807111564298854aabfc890edcc8' to type 'MyProject.Web.ICustomPrincipal'. I guess I still need some practice with interfaces and moq but shouldn't I be able to cast the class that moq created back to ICustomPrincipal? I know httpContext.User returns an IPrincipal so maybe something gets lost there? Well if anybody can help me I would appreciate that. Pickels Edit: As requested the full code of the method I am testing. It's still not finished but this is what I have so far: public bool AuthorizeCore(HttpContextBase httpContext) { if (httpContext == null) { throw new ArgumentNullException("httpContext"); } var user = (ICustomPrincipal)httpContext.User; if (!user.Identity.IsAuthenticated) { return false; } return true; }

    Read the article

  • NoRM MongoConfiguration

    - by user365836
    Something is wrong with my MongoConfiguration I think, I read the following on NoRM's google group: On Mar 22, 3:14 am, Andrew Theken wrote: It can easily live in the object: public class POCO{ //implicitly runs one time. static POCO(){   MongoConfiguration.Initialize(cfg= cfg.For<POCO>(f=     {        f.ForProperty(p=p.ALongProperty).UseAlias("A");        f.ForProperty(p=p.AnotherLongProperty).UseAlias("B");        //etc.     }    }    public string ALongProperty {get;set;}    public int AnotherLongProperty{get;set;} } ;-) //Andrew Theken In my class I have public class Item { static Item() { MongoConfiguration.Initialize( cfg=> cfg.For<Item>( c => { c.ForProperty(i => i.Name).UseAlias("N"); c.ForProperty(i => i.Description).UseAlias("D"); }) ); } public String Name { get; set; } public String Description { get; set; } } After I save them there are items in DB with short key namse, the problem is when I try to read up all previously created items on start I get no items back.

    Read the article

  • TDD test data loading methods

    - by Dave Hanson
    I am a TDD newb and I would like to figure out how to test the following code. I am trying to write my tests first, but I am having trouble for creating a test that touches my DataAccessor. I can't figure out how to fake it. I've done the extend the shipment class and override the Load() method; to continue testing the object. I feel as though I end up unit testing my Mock objects/stubs and not my real objects. I thought in TDD the unit tests were supposed to hit ALL of the methods on the object; however I can never seem to test that Load() code only the overriden Mock Load My tests were write an object that contains a list of orders based off of shipment number. I have an object that loads itself from the database. public class Shipment { //member variables protected List<string> _listOfOrders = new List<string>(); protected string _id = "" //public properties public List<string> ListOrders { get{ return _listOfOrders; } } public Shipment(string id) { _id = id; Load(); } //PROBLEM METHOD // whenever I write code that needs this Shipment object, this method tries // to hit the DB and fubars my tests // the only way to get around is to have all my tests run on a fake Shipment object. protected void Load() { _listOfOrders = DataAccessor.GetOrders(_id); } } I create my fake shipment class to test the rest of the classes methods .I can't ever test the Real load method without having an actual DB connection public class FakeShipment : Shipment { protected new void Load() { _listOfOrders = new List<string>(); } } Any thoughts? Please advise. Dave

    Read the article

  • Creating Dependencies Only to be able to Unit Test

    - by arin
    I just created a Manager that deals with a SuperClass that is extended all over the code base and registered with some sort of SuperClassManager (SCM). Now I would like to test my Manager that is aware of only the SuperClass. I tried to create a concrete SCM, however, that depends on a third party library and therefore I failed to do that in my jUnit test. Now the option is to mock all instances of this SCM. All is good until now, however, when my Manager deals with the SCM, it returns children of the SuperClass that my Manager does not know or care about. Nevertheless, the identities of these children are vital for my tests (for equality, etc.). Since I cannot use the concrete SCM, I have to mock the results of calls to the appropriate functions of the SCM, however, this means that my tests and therefore my Manager need to know and care about the children of the SuperClass. Checking the code base, there does not seem to be a more appropriate location for my test (that already maintains the appropriate real dependencies). Is it worth it to introduce unnecessary dependencies for the sake of unit testing?

    Read the article

  • Trouble getting started with Spring Roo and GWT

    - by Abdel Olakara
    Hi all, I am trying to get started with SpringRoo and GWT after seeing the keynote.. unfortunately I am stuck at this issue. I successfully created the project using Roo and added the persistence, the entities and when I perform the command "perform package" I get this error: 23/5/10 12:10:13 AM AST: [ERROR] ApplicationEntityTypesProcessor cannot be resolved 23/5/10 12:10:13 AM AST: [ERROR] ApplicationEntityTypesProcessor cannot be resolved to a type 23/5/10 12:10:13 AM AST: [WARN] advice defined in org.springframework.mock.staticmock.AnnotationDrivenStaticEntityMockingControl has not been applied [Xlint:adviceDidNotMatch] 23/5/10 12:10:13 AM AST: [WARN] advice defined in org.springframework.mock.staticmock.AbstractMethodMockingControl has not been applied [Xlint:adviceDidNotMatch] 23/5/10 12:10:13 AM AST: Build errors for helloroo; org.apache.maven.lifecycle.LifecycleExecutionException: Failed to execute goal org.codehaus.mojo:aspectj-maven-plugin:1.0:compile (default) on project helloroo: Compiler errors : error at import tp.gwt.request.ApplicationEntityTypesProcessor; I see this in the Maven console and cannot complete the build..I know there is some jar missing but how and why? because I downloaded all the latest version including GWT milestone release. Any idea why this error is occurring? How do I resolve this issue? Thanks in Advance, Abdel Olakara

    Read the article

  • How do I unit test a finalizer?

    - by GraemeF
    I have the following class which is a decorator for an IDisposable object (I have omitted the stuff it adds) which itself implements IDisposable using a common pattern: public class DisposableDecorator : IDisposable { private readonly IDisposable _innerDisposable; public DisposableDecorator(IDisposable innerDisposable) { _innerDisposable = innerDisposable; } #region IDisposable Members public void Dispose() { Dispose(true); GC.SuppressFinalize(this); } #endregion ~DisposableDecorator() { Dispose(false); } protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing) { if (disposing) _innerDisposable.Dispose(); } } I can easily test that innerDisposable is disposed when Dispose() is called: [Test] public void Dispose__DisposesInnerDisposable() { var mockInnerDisposable = new Mock<IDisposable>(); new DisposableDecorator(mockInnerDisposable.Object).Dispose(); mockInnerDisposable.Verify(x => x.Dispose()); } But how do I write a test to make sure innerDisposable does not get disposed by the finalizer? I want to write something like this but it fails, presumably because the finalizer hasn't been called by the GC thread: [Test] public void Finalizer__DoesNotDisposeInnerDisposable() { var mockInnerDisposable = new Mock<IDisposable>(); new DisposableDecorator(mockInnerDisposable.Object); GC.Collect(); mockInnerDisposable.Verify(x => x.Dispose(), Times.Never()); }

    Read the article

  • NMock2.0 - how to stub a non interface call?

    - by dferraro
    Hello, I have a class API which has full code coverage and uses DI to mock out all the logic in the main class function (Job.Run) which does all the work. I found a bug in production where we werent doing some validation on one of the data input fields. So, I added a stub function called ValidateFoo()... Wrote a unit test against this function to Expect a JobFailedException, ran the test - it failed obviously because that function was empty. I added the validation logic, and now the test passes. Great, now we know the validation works. Problem is - how do I write the test to make sure that ValidateFoo() is actually called inside Job.Run()? ValidateFoo() is a private method of the Job class - so it's not an interface... Is there anyway to do this with NMock2.0? I know TypeMock supports fakes of non interface types. But changing mock libs right now is not an option. At this point if NMock can't support it, I will simply just add the ValidateFoo() call to the Run() method and test things manually - which obviously I'd prefer not to do considering my Job.Run() method has 100% coverage right now. Any Advice? Thanks very much it is appreciated. EDIT: the other option I have in mind is to just create an integration test for my Job.Run functionality (injecting to it true implementations of the composite objects instead of mocks). I will give it a bad input value for that field and then validate that the job failed. This works and covers my test - but it's not really a unit test but instead an integration test that tests one unit of functionality.... hmm.. EDIT2: IS there any way to do tihs? Anyone have ideas? Maybe TypeMock - or a better design?

    Read the article

  • Mocking an object that uses jni using EasyMock

    - by Visage
    So my class under test has code that looks braodly like this public void doSomething(int param) { Report report = new Report() ...do some calculations report.someMethod(someData) } my intention was to extract the construction of report into a protected method and override it to use a mock object that I could then test to ensure that someMethod had been called with the right data. So far so good. But Report isnt under my control, and to mkae things worse it uses JNI to load a library at runtime. If I do Report report = EasyMock.createMock(Report.class) then EasyMock attempts to use reflection to find out the class members, but this causes an attempt to load the JNI library, which fails (the JNI libraries are only available on UNIX). Im considering two things: a) Introduce a ReportWrapper interface with two implementations, one of which will delegate calls to an real Report (so basically a Proxy), and a second which will basically use a mock object. or b) instead of calling someMethod, call a protected method which will in turn call someMethod that I can override in a testing subclass. Either way it seems nasty. Any better ways?

    Read the article

  • Spring Stripes framework problem

    - by ali
    I am new to stripes and am attempting to integrate spring into stripes In the following code : public class ContactFormActionBeanTest { private static MockServletContext mockServletContext; private static MockHttpSession mockSession; @BeforeClass public static void setup() throws Exception { mockServletContext = new MockServletContext("webmail"); Map<String,String> params = new HashMap<String,String>(); params.put("ActionResolver.Packages", "stripesbook.action"); params.put("Extension.Packages", "stripesbook.ext," + "net.sourceforge.stripes.integration.spring"); mockServletContext.addFilter(StripesFilter.class, "StripesFilter", params); mockServletContext.setServlet(DispatcherServlet.class, "DispatcherServlet", null); mockSession = new MockHttpSession(mockServletContext); mockServletContext.addInitParameter("contextConfigLocation", "/WEB-INF/applicationContext-test.xml"); ContextLoaderListener springContextLoader = new ContextLoaderListener(); springContextLoader.contextInitialized( new ServletContextEvent(mockServletContext)); // Load mock user MockRoundtrip trip = new MockRoundtrip(mockServletContext, MockDataLoaderActionBean.class, mockSession); trip.execute(); // Login mock user trip = new MockRoundtrip(mockServletContext, LoginActionBean.class, mockSession); trip.setParameter("username", "freddy"); trip.setParameter("password", "nadia"); trip.execute("login"); } I get null in springContextLoader ContextLoaderListener springContextLoader = new ContextLoaderListener(); and test fails. Am I missing something? I am using eclipse with maven. Also when I try to deploy it for tomcat 6.0 I get following warnings: WARN net.sourceforge.stripes.util.ResolverUtil - Could not examine class 'stripesbook/ext/ContactFormatter.class' due to a java.lang.UnsupportedClassVersionError with message: Bad version number in .class file (unable to load class stripesbook.ext.ContactFormatter) I have checked to be sure that I am compiling with Java 5(set JDK compiler to 1.5) instead of 1.6 (Java 6); but didn't work out for me and still have problems running spring-stripes integrated project.

    Read the article

  • How to read/write high-resolution (24-bit, 8 channel) .wav files in Java?

    - by dB'
    I'm trying to write a Java application that manipulates high resolution .wav files. I'm having trouble importing the audio data, i.e. converting the .wav file into an array of doubles. When I use a standard approach an exception is thrown. AudioFileFormat as = AudioSystem.getAudioFileFormat(new File("orig.wav")); --> javax.sound.sampled.UnsupportedAudioFileException: file is not a supported file type Here's the file format info according to soxi: dB$ soxi orig.wav soxi WARN wav: wave header missing FmtExt chunk Input File : 'orig.wav' Channels : 8 Sample Rate : 96000 Precision : 24-bit Duration : 00:00:03.16 = 303526 samples ~ 237.13 CDDA sectors File Size : 9.71M Bit Rate : 24.6M Sample Encoding: 32-bit Floating Point PCM Can anyone suggest the simplest method for getting this audio into Java? I've tried using a few techniques. As stated above, I've experimented with the Java AudioSystem (on both Mac and Windows). I've also tried using Andrew Greensted's WavFile class, but this also fails (WavFileException: Compression Code 3 not supported). One workaround is to convert the audio to 16 bits using sox (with the -b 16 flag), but this is suboptimal since it increases the noise floor. Incidentally, I've noticed that the file CAN be read by libsndfile. Is my best bet to write a jni wrapper around libsndfile, or can you suggest something quicker? Note that I don't need to play the audio, I just need to analyze it, manipulate it, and then write it out to a new .wav file. * UPDATE * I solved this problem by modifying Andrew Greensted's WavFile class. His original version only read files encoded as integer values ("format code 1"); my files were encoded as floats ("format code 3"), and that's what was causing the problem. I'll post the modified version of Greensted's code when I get a chance. In the meantime, if anyone wants it, send me a message.

    Read the article

  • Simplifying Testing through design considerations while utilizing dependency injection

    - by Adam Driscoll
    We are a few months into a green-field project to rework the Logic and Business layers of our product. By utilizing MEF (dependency injection) we have achieved high levels of code coverage and I believe that we have a pretty solid product. As we have been working through some of the more complex logic I have found it increasingly difficult to unit test. We are utilizing the CompositionContainer to query for types required by these complex algorithms. My unit tests are sometimes difficult to follow due to the lengthy mock object setup process that must take place, just right, to allow for certain circumstances to be verified. My unit tests often take me longer to write than the code that I'm trying to test. I realize this is not only an issue with dependency injection but with design as a whole. Is poor method design or lack of composition to blame for my overly complex tests? I've tried base classing tests, creating commonly used mock objects and ensuring that I utilize the container as much as possible to ease this issue but my tests always end up quite complex and hard to debug. What are some tips that you've seen to keep such tests concise, readable, and effective?

    Read the article

  • How to add items to a list in Rhino Mocks

    - by waltid
    I have method (which is part of IMyInteface) like this: interface IMyInterface { void MyMethod(IList<Foo> list); } I have the ClassUnderTest: class ClassUnderTest { IMyInterface Bar {get; set;} bool AMethod() { var list = new List<Foo>(); Bar.MyMethod(list); return list.Count()>0; } My Test with Rhino Mocks looks like this: var mocks = new MockRepository(); var myMock = mocks.StrictMock<IMyInterface>(); var myList = new List<Foo>(); var cUT = new ClassUnderTest(); cUT = myMock; myMock.MyMethod(myList); //How can I add some items to myList in the mock? mocks.Replay(myMock); var result = cUt.AMethod(); Assert.AreEqual(True, result); How can I now add some items to myList in the mock?

    Read the article

  • Rhinomocks DynamicMock question

    - by epitka
    My dynamic mock behaves as Parial mock, meaning it executes the actual code when called. Here are the ways I tried it var mockProposal = _mockRepository.DynamicMock<BidProposal>(); SetupResult.For(mockProposal.CreateMarketingPlan(null, null, null)).IgnoreArguments().Repeat.Once().Return( copyPlan); //Expect.Call(mockProposal.CreateMarketingPlan(null, null, null)).IgnoreArguments().Repeat.Once().Return( // copyPlan); // mockProposal.Expect(x => x.CreateMarketingPlan(null, null, null)).IgnoreArguments().Return(copyPlan).Repeat.Once(); Instead of just returning what I expect it runs the code in the method CreateMarketingPlan Here is the error: System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object. at Policy.Entities.MarketingPlan.SetMarketingPlanName(MarketingPlanDescription description) in MarketingPlan.cs: line 76 at Policy.Entities.MarketingPlan.set_MarketingPlanDescription(MarketingPlanDescription value) in MarketingPlan.cs: line 91 at Policy.Entities.MarketingPlan.Create(PPOBenefits ppoBenefits, MarketingPlanDescription marketingPlanDescription, MarketingPlanType marketingPlanType) in MarketingPlan.cs: line 23 at Policy.Entities.BidProposal.CreateMarketingPlan(PPOBenefits ppoBenefits, MarketingPlanDescription marketingPlanDescription, MarketingPlanType marketingPlanType) in BidProposal.cs: line 449 at Tests.Policy.Services.MarketingPlanCopyServiceTests.can_copy_MarketingPlan_with_all_options() in MarketingPlanCopyServiceTests.cs: line 32 Update: I figured out what it was. Method was not "virtual" so it could not be mocked because non-virtual methods cannot be proxied.

    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

  • Using Moq to set indexers in C#

    - by emddudley
    I'm having trouble figuring out how to set indexers in C# with Moq. The Moq documentation is weak, and I've done a lot of searching... what I'd like to do is similar in the solution to How to Moq Setting an Indexed property: var someClass = new Mock<ISomeClass>(); someClass.SetupSet(o => o.SomeIndexedProperty[3] = 25); I want to modify the above to work for any index and any value so I can just do something like this: someClass.Object.SomeIndexedProperty[1] = 5; Currently I have the following, which works great for the indexed property getter, but if I ever set the value Moq ignores it: var someValues = new int[] { 10, 20, 30, 40 }; var someClass = new Mock<ISomeClass>(); someClass.Setup(o => o.SomeIndexedProperty[It.IsAny<int>()]) .Returns<int>(index => someValues[index]); // Moq doesn't set the value below, so the Assert fails! someClass.Object.SomeIndexedProperty[3] = 25; Assert.AreEqual(25, someClass.Object.SomeIndexedProperty[3]);

    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

  • Which JavaScript or ASP.NET Charting Component/Tool/Library Will Work For This?

    - by Jason Bunting
    [Update]: Forgot to include ComponentArt... Hi, An interaction designer employed by the client I am currently working for produced some mock-ups, and now it is my job to determine the best way of implementing the charts included therein. After looking at the options I am aware of and was able to find doing some simple Google searches, I have narrowed it down to using either ComponentArt, Dundas Charts or Infragistics, simply because from what I can see of their demos, they have certain features I believe I will need to get things done. Here are the pictures from the mock-ups - ideally I need one piece of software that will cover all of these: This chart seems to be simple enough. Notice the arbitrary spacing between the years - not yet sure if this will be a sticking-point for the client or not. I don't know that I have ever seen a chart like this one - it combines the previous chart with some additional data. Here is the same chart, only this time illustrating what happens when a user mouses-over or clicks on an annotation within the chart. They want the nice styling within the pop-up, so the pop-up needs to be something like an iframe or similar. Any ideas or recommendations would be appreciated, I haven't used charting controls in years, so I am at a bit of a loss and the client wants an estimate soon. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • java - powermock whenNew doesnt seem to work, calls the actual constructor

    - by user1331243
    I have two final classes that are used in my unit test. I am trying to use whenNew on the constructor of a final class, but I see that it calls the actual constructor. The code is @PrepareForTest({A.class, B.class, Provider.class}) @Test public void testGetStatus() throws Exception { B b = mock(B.class); when(b.getStatus()).thenReturn(1); whenNew(B.class).withArguments(anyString()).thenReturn(b); Provider p = new Provider(); int val = p.getStatus(); assertTrue((val == 1)); } public class Provider { public int getStatus() { B b = new B("test"); return b.getStatus(); } } public final class A { private void init() { // ...do soemthing } private static A a; private A() { } public static A getInstance() { if (a == null) { a = new A(); a.init(); } return a; } } public final class B { public B() { } public B(String s) { this(A.getInstance(), s); } public B(A a, String s) { } public int getStatus() { return 0; } } On debug, I find that its the actual class B instance created and not the mock instance that is returned for new usage and assertion fails. Any pointers on how to get this working. Thanks

    Read the article

  • What would be the light way to render a JSP page without an App/Web Server

    - by kolrie
    First, some background: I will have to work on code for a JSP that will demand a lot of code fixing and testing. This JSP will receive a structure of given objects, and render it according to a couple of rules. What I would like to do, is to write a "Test Server" that would read some mock data out of a fixtures file, and mock those objects into a factory that would be used by the JSP in question. The target App Server is WebSphere and I would like to code, change, code in order to test appropriate HTML rendering. I have done something similar on the past, but the JSP part was just calling a method on a rendering object, so I created an Ad Hoc HTTP server that would read the fixture files, parse it and render HTML. All I had to do was run it inside RAD, change the HTML code and hit F5. So question pretty much goes down to: Is there any stand alone library or lightweight server (I thought of Jetty) that would take a JSP, and given the correct contexts (Request, Response, Session, etc.) render the proper HTML?

    Read the article

  • Am I mocking this helper function right in my Django test?

    - by CppLearner
    lib.py from django.core.urlresolvers import reverse def render_reverse(f, kwargs): """ kwargs is a dictionary, usually of the form {'args': [cbid]} """ return reverse(f, **kwargs) tests.py from lib import render_reverse, print_ls class LibTest(unittest.TestCase): def test_render_reverse_is_correct(self): #with patch('webclient.apps.codebundles.lib.reverse') as mock_reverse: with patch('django.core.urlresolvers.reverse') as mock_reverse: from lib import render_reverse mock_f = MagicMock(name='f', return_value='dummy_views') mock_kwargs = MagicMock(name='kwargs',return_value={'args':['123']}) mock_reverse.return_value = '/natrium/cb/details/123' response = render_reverse(mock_f(), mock_kwargs()) self.assertTrue('/natrium/cb/details/' in response) But instead, I get File "/var/lib/graphyte-webclient/graphyte-webenv/lib/python2.6/site-packages/django/core/urlresolvers.py", line 296, in reverse "arguments '%s' not found." % (lookup_view_s, args, kwargs)) NoReverseMatch: Reverse for 'dummy_readfile' with arguments '('123',)' and keyword arguments '{}' not found. Why is it calling reverse instead of my mock_reverse (it is looking up my urls.py!!) The author of Mock library Michael Foord did a video cast here (around 9:17), and in the example he passed the mock object request to the view function index. Furthermore, he patched POll and assigned an expected return value. Isn't that what I am doing here? I patched reverse? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Changing default compiler in Linux, using SCons

    - by ereOn
    On my Linux platform, I have several versions of gcc. Under usr/bin I have: gcc34 gcc44 gcc Here are some outputs: $ gcc --version gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-48) $ gcc44 --version gcc44 (GCC) 4.4.0 20090514 (Red Hat 4.4.0-6) I need to use the 4.4 version of gcc however the default seems to the 4.1 one. I there a way to replace /usr/bin/gcc and make gcc44 the default compiler not using a symlink to /usr/bin/gcc44 ? The reason why I can't use a symlink is because my code will have to be shipped in a RPM package using mock. mock creates a minimal linux installation from scratch and just install the specified dependencies before compiling my code in it. I cannot customize this "minimal installation". Ideally, the perfect solution would be to install an official RPM package that replaces gcc with gcc44 as the default compiler. Is there such a package ? Is this even possible/good ? Additional information I have to use SCons (a make alternative) and it doesn't let me specify the binary to use for gcc. I will also accept any answer that will tell me how to specify the gcc binary in my SConstruct file.

    Read the article

  • Does new JUnit 4.8 @Category render test suites almost obsolete?

    - by grigory
    Given question 'How to run all tests belonging to a certain Category?' and the answer would the following approach be better for test organization? define master test suite that contains all tests (e.g. using ClasspathSuite) design sufficient set of JUnit categories (sufficient means that every desirable collection of sets is identifiable using one or more categories) define targeted test suites based on master test suite and set of categories For example: identify categories for speed (slow, fast), dependencies (mock, database, integration), function (), domain ( demand that each test is properly qualified (tagged) with relevant set of categories. create master test suite using ClasspathSuite (all tests found in classpath) create targeted suites by qualifying master test suite with categories, e.g. mock test suite, fast database test suite, slow integration for domain X test suite, etc. My question is more like soliciting approval rate for such approach vs. classic test suite approach. One unbeatable benefit is that every new test is immediately contained by relevant suites with no suite maintenance. One concern is proper categorization of each test.

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing the Use of TransactionScope

    - by Randolpho
    The preamble: I have designed a strongly interfaced and fully mockable data layer class that expects the business layer to create a TransactionScope when multiple calls should be included in a single transaction. The problem: I would like to unit test that my business layer makes use of a TransactionScope object when I expect it to. Unfortunately, the standard pattern for using TransactionScope is a follows: using(var scope = new TransactionScope()) { // transactional methods datalayer.InsertFoo(); datalayer.InsertBar(); scope.Complete(); } While this is a really great pattern in terms of usability for the programmer, testing that it's done seems... unpossible to me. I cannot detect that a transient object has been instantiated, let alone mock it to determine that a method was called on it. Yet my goal for coverage implies that I must. The Question: How can I go about building unit tests that ensure TransactionScope is used appropriately according to the standard pattern? Final Thoughts: I've considered a solution that would certainly provide the coverage I need, but have rejected it as overly complex and not conforming to the standard TransactionScope pattern. It involves adding a CreateTransactionScope method on my data layer object that returns an instance of TransactionScope. But because TransactionScope contains constructor logic and non-virtual methods and is therefore difficult if not impossible to mock, CreateTransactionScope would return an instance of DataLayerTransactionScope which would be a mockable facade into TransactionScope. While this might do the job it's complex and I would prefer to use the standard pattern. Is there a better way?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78  | Next Page >