Search Results

Search found 25386 results on 1016 pages for 'zend test'.

Page 76/1016 | < Previous Page | 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83  | Next Page >

  • udp expected behaviour not responding to test result

    - by ernst
    I have a local network topology that is structured as follows: three hosts and a switch in the middle. I am using a switch that supports 10,100,1000 Mbit/s full/half duplex connection. I have configured the hosts with a static ip 172.16.0.1-2-3/25. This is the output of ifconfig eth0 Link encap: Ethernet HWaddr ***** inet addr:172.16.0.3 Bcast:172.16.0.127 Mask:255.255.255.128 UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B) Interrupt:16 The output on H1 and H2 is perfectly matchable They are mutually reachable since i have tested the network with ping. I have forced the ethernet interface to work at 10M with ethtool -s eth0 speed 10 duplex full autoneg on this is the output of ethtool eth0 supported ports: [ TP ] Supported link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full 100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full 1000baseT/Half 1000baseT/Full S upported pause frame use: No Supports auto-negotiation: Yes Advertised link modes: 10baseT/Full Advertised pause frame use: Symmetric A dvertised auto-negotiation: Yes Speed: 10Mb/s Duplex: Full Port: Twisted Pair PHYAD: 1 Transceiver: internal Auto-negotiation: on MDI-X: Unknown Supports Wake-on: g Wake-on: d Current message level: 0x000000ff (255) drv probe link timer ifdown ifup rx_err tx_err Link detected: yes – I am doing an experimental test using nttcp to calculate the GOODPUT in the case that H1 and H2 at the same time send data to H3. Since the three links have the same forced capability and the amount of arrving data speed is 10 from H1+10 from H2--20M to H3 it would be expected a bottleneck effect and, due to the non reliable nature of udp, a packet loss. But this doesn't appen since the output of nttcp application shows the same number of byte sended and received. this is the output of nttcp on h3 nttcp -T -r -u 172.16.0.2 & nttcp -T -r -u 172.16.0.1 [1] 4071 Bytes Real s CPU s Real-MBit/s CPU-MBit/s Calls Real-C/s CPU-C/s l 8388608 13.74 0.05 4.8848 1398.0140 2049 149.14 42684.8 Bytes Real s CPU s Real-MBit/s CPU-MBit/s Calls Real-C/s CPU-C/s l 8388608 14.02 0.05 4.7872 1398.0140 2049 146.17 42684.8 1 8388608 13.56 0.06 4.9500 1118.4065 2051 151.28 34181.1 1 8388608 13.89 0.06 4.8310 1198.3084 2051 147.65 36623.0 – How is this possible? Am i missing something? Any help will be gratefully apprecciated, Best regards

    Read the article

  • Eclipse: Slow startup time

    - by ct2k7
    Hello, I've got Eclipse 3.6.1 on my MacBook Air (2010), and I'm getting slowish startup times. Well, slow, compared to my Desktop, which is somewhat less powerful and a few years old). The startup generally takes 15 seconds, and of this, 4 is spent just on the Eclipse splash screen, before Eclipse loads anything. No projects are open at startup. Here's a copy of my eclipse.ini. -startup ../../../plugins/org.eclipse.equinox.launcher_1.1.0.v20100507.jar --launcher.library ../../../plugins/org.eclipse.equinox.launcher.cocoa.macosx.x86_64_1.1.1.R36x_v20100810 -showsplash org.eclipse.platform --launcher.XXMaxPermSize 512m --launcher.defaultAction openFile -vmargs -Xms256m -Xmx512m -Xdock:icon=../Resources/Eclipse.icns -XstartOnFirstThread -Dorg.eclipse.swt.internal.carbon.smallFonts -Dosgi.requiredJavaVersion=1.6 -Xverify:none -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC -XX:+CMSClassUnloadingEnabled -XX:+CMSPermGenSweepingEnabled -XX:+UnlockExperimentalVMOptions -XX:+AggressiveOpts -XX:+StringCache -XX:+UseFastAccessorMethods -XX:+UseLargePages -XX:LargePageSizeInBytes=4m -XX:AllocatePrefetchLines=1 -XX:AllocatePrefetchStyle=1 -Dide.gc=true The problem doesn't seem to be related to plugins - I've disabled the ones which I don't need, and regardless of this configuration or whether all of them are selected on startup, it only takes 1second to load the plugins. I'm running Eclipse 3.6.1 Cocoa x64 build (vanilla) with the Zend Studio plugin. The machine has 4GB RAM, an SSD with over 64% free space, 1.6GHz (4MB L2 Cache). OS is Mac OS X 10.6.6, latest Java available, 1.6. For comparison, my Desktop, an old P4 3GHZ (512K L2 Cache) with a 7200RPM drive, under 40% free space, Eclipse (same config) loads in under 7 seconds, consistently. Note, this one is a Windows machine, with latest Java installed.

    Read the article

  • WAMP Installation - Multiple PHP Version Issues

    - by Pete171
    I have installed WAMP because I am attempting to modify an an application which uses Zend Optimizer (I cannot use Z.O. with PHP5.3+, which is why I decided to install WAMP). I downloaded the latest version - Wamp Server 2.1 - which comes bundled with PHP5.3.5. I then downloaded a PHP version that would be compatible with Z.O. - 5.2.9. - and a compatible Apache version, 2.0.63. My problem: PHP scripts run fine, but anything with MySQL does not work. Running the testmysql.php script returns the fatal error: Fatal error: Call to undefined function mysql_connect() in C:\wamp\www\testmysql.php on line 2". I have looked in the PHP INI files inside both PHP versions, and I'm fairly sure the relevant information is there. At least, there are parts inside that mention MySQL! Perhaps somebody could clarify exactly what information should be present? Also, when visiting a page that called phpinfo(), I noticed that the 'Loaded Configuration File' was pointing to C:\wamp\bin\php\php5.3.5\php.ini, even though I have enabled the older PHP version. I've stopped and started Apache, too, and that hasn't made a difference. Is anybody able to offer any assistance? Anything at all would be great; I'm not very good at messing around with Apache/

    Read the article

  • Alias for Drupal "Sites" folder with Apache on Windows Server 2008

    - by sgtbeano
    I'm having to move a number of sites from a LAMP stack to a WAMP one, provided by Zend, and I've hit a problem. Our architecture is a number of loadbalanced web servers which have their own local webapp drives which are kept in sync with one server performing as the master copy. There is then a separate DFS share provided to all web servers from our pillar san. Usually a Drupal install under our LAMP cluster would have the main Drupal web app in a local HTDOCS mount for each server and the SITES directory within Drupal would then be symlinked out to the DFS or NFS share so that there is a common FILES and TMP directory. The problem I'm having is that there seems to be no equivalent of symlinks on Win Server 2008, shortcuts have a .ink at the end making Apache see them as a distinct file. So I've tried using an alias call in the vhost file like this; <Location /drupal-626/sites> Order deny, allow Allow from all </Location> Alias /drupal-626/sites "Z:\Path to alternate sites directory" The root for this test is; http://main-domain-url/drupal-626/ Unfortunately this isn't work so I'm wondering if any of you have a solution which would work? Many thanks for taking the time to read this.

    Read the article

  • Virtual host Alias not routing properly

    - by Jacob
    I apologize if this question has been asked many times in the past. I am not 100% sure of the exact cause of my issue and am out of google magic right now. Basically I have a virtual host file setup with an Alias record that points to a different directory other the document root. It basically looks like this <VirtualHost *:80> ServerName iBusinessCentral.com ServerAdmin [email protected] DocumentRoot /var/www/marketingsites/ ServerAlias iBusinessCentral.com *.iBusinessCentral.com Alias /unsub "/var/www/unsub/site_index/" </VirtualHost> When I navigate to ibusinesscentral.com/unsub/?randomquerystring I am directed to the correct folder. If I remove the query string and navigate to ibusinesscentral.com/unsub/ I am taken to the directory in the document root. The unsub directory is a zend application and I need to be able to navigate to different url paths like ibusinesscentral.com/unsub/unenroll?querystring I have tried using AliasMatch instead of Alias. I have also tried adding a slash after the unsub portion of the Alias record, and have not had any luck to this point. Thanks in advance for any assistance

    Read the article

  • Informed TDD &ndash; Kata &ldquo;To Roman Numerals&rdquo;

    - by Ralf Westphal
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/theArchitectsNapkin/archive/2014/05/28/informed-tdd-ndash-kata-ldquoto-roman-numeralsrdquo.aspxIn a comment on my article on what I call Informed TDD (ITDD) reader gustav asked how this approach would apply to the kata “To Roman Numerals”. And whether ITDD wasn´t a violation of TDD´s principle of leaving out “advanced topics like mocks”. I like to respond with this article to his questions. There´s more to say than fits into a commentary. Mocks and TDD I don´t see in how far TDD is avoiding or opposed to mocks. TDD and mocks are orthogonal. TDD is about pocess, mocks are about structure and costs. Maybe by moving forward in tiny red+green+refactor steps less need arises for mocks. But then… if the functionality you need to implement requires “expensive” resource access you can´t avoid using mocks. Because you don´t want to constantly run all your tests against the real resource. True, in ITDD mocks seem to be in almost inflationary use. That´s not what you usually see in TDD demonstrations. However, there´s a reason for that as I tried to explain. I don´t use mocks as proxies for “expensive” resource. Rather they are stand-ins for functionality not yet implemented. They allow me to get a test green on a high level of abstraction. That way I can move forward in a top-down fashion. But if you think of mocks as “advanced” or if you don´t want to use a tool like JustMock, then you don´t need to use mocks. You just need to stand the sight of red tests for a little longer ;-) Let me show you what I mean by that by doing a kata. ITDD for “To Roman Numerals” gustav asked for the kata “To Roman Numerals”. I won´t explain the requirements again. You can find descriptions and TDD demonstrations all over the internet, like this one from Corey Haines. Now here is, how I would do this kata differently. 1. Analyse A demonstration of TDD should never skip the analysis phase. It should be made explicit. The requirements should be formalized and acceptance test cases should be compiled. “Formalization” in this case to me means describing the API of the required functionality. “[D]esign a program to work with Roman numerals” like written in this “requirement document” is not enough to start software development. Coding should only begin, if the interface between the “system under development” and its context is clear. If this interface is not readily recognizable from the requirements, it has to be developed first. Exploration of interface alternatives might be in order. It might be necessary to show several interface mock-ups to the customer – even if that´s you fellow developer. Designing the interface is a task of it´s own. It should not be mixed with implementing the required functionality behind the interface. Unfortunately, though, this happens quite often in TDD demonstrations. TDD is used to explore the API and implement it at the same time. To me that´s a violation of the Single Responsibility Principle (SRP) which not only should hold for software functional units but also for tasks or activities. In the case of this kata the API fortunately is obvious. Just one function is needed: string ToRoman(int arabic). And it lives in a class ArabicRomanConversions. Now what about acceptance test cases? There are hardly any stated in the kata descriptions. Roman numerals are explained, but no specific test cases from the point of view of a customer. So I just “invent” some acceptance test cases by picking roman numerals from a wikipedia article. They are supposed to be just “typical examples” without special meaning. Given the acceptance test cases I then try to develop an understanding of the problem domain. I´ll spare you that. The domain is trivial and is explain in almost all kata descriptions. How roman numerals are built is not difficult to understand. What´s more difficult, though, might be to find an efficient solution to convert into them automatically. 2. Solve The usual TDD demonstration skips a solution finding phase. Like the interface exploration it´s mixed in with the implementation. But I don´t think this is how it should be done. I even think this is not how it really works for the people demonstrating TDD. They´re simplifying their true software development process because they want to show a streamlined TDD process. I doubt this is helping anybody. Before you code you better have a plan what to code. This does not mean you have to do “Big Design Up-Front”. It just means: Have a clear picture of the logical solution in your head before you start to build a physical solution (code). Evidently such a solution can only be as good as your understanding of the problem. If that´s limited your solution will be limited, too. Fortunately, in the case of this kata your understanding does not need to be limited. Thus the logical solution does not need to be limited or preliminary or tentative. That does not mean you need to know every line of code in advance. It just means you know the rough structure of your implementation beforehand. Because it should mirror the process described by the logical or conceptual solution. Here´s my solution approach: The arabic “encoding” of numbers represents them as an ordered set of powers of 10. Each digit is a factor to multiply a power of ten with. The “encoding” 123 is the short form for a set like this: {1*10^2, 2*10^1, 3*10^0}. And the number is the sum of the set members. The roman “encoding” is different. There is no base (like 10 for arabic numbers), there are just digits of different value, and they have to be written in descending order. The “encoding” XVI is short for [10, 5, 1]. And the number is still the sum of the members of this list. The roman “encoding” thus is simpler than the arabic. Each “digit” can be taken at face value. No multiplication with a base required. But what about IV which looks like a contradiction to the above rule? It is not – if you accept roman “digits” not to be limited to be single characters only. Usually I, V, X, L, C, D, M are viewed as “digits”, and IV, IX etc. are viewed as nuisances preventing a simple solution. All looks different, though, once IV, IX etc. are taken as “digits”. Then MCMLIV is just a sum: M+CM+L+IV which is 1000+900+50+4. Whereas before it would have been understood as M-C+M+L-I+V – which is more difficult because here some “digits” get subtracted. Here´s the list of roman “digits” with their values: {1, I}, {4, IV}, {5, V}, {9, IX}, {10, X}, {40, XL}, {50, L}, {90, XC}, {100, C}, {400, CD}, {500, D}, {900, CM}, {1000, M} Since I take IV, IX etc. as “digits” translating an arabic number becomes trivial. I just need to find the values of the roman “digits” making up the number, e.g. 1954 is made up of 1000, 900, 50, and 4. I call those “digits” factors. If I move from the highest factor (M=1000) to the lowest (I=1) then translation is a two phase process: Find all the factors Translate the factors found Compile the roman representation Translation is just a look-up. Finding, though, needs some calculation: Find the highest remaining factor fitting in the value Remember and subtract it from the value Repeat with remaining value and remaining factors Please note: This is just an algorithm. It´s not code, even though it might be close. Being so close to code in my solution approach is due to the triviality of the problem. In more realistic examples the conceptual solution would be on a higher level of abstraction. With this solution in hand I finally can do what TDD advocates: find and prioritize test cases. As I can see from the small process description above, there are two aspects to test: Test the translation Test the compilation Test finding the factors Testing the translation primarily means to check if the map of factors and digits is comprehensive. That´s simple, even though it might be tedious. Testing the compilation is trivial. Testing factor finding, though, is a tad more complicated. I can think of several steps: First check, if an arabic number equal to a factor is processed correctly (e.g. 1000=M). Then check if an arabic number consisting of two consecutive factors (e.g. 1900=[M,CM]) is processed correctly. Then check, if a number consisting of the same factor twice is processed correctly (e.g. 2000=[M,M]). Finally check, if an arabic number consisting of non-consecutive factors (e.g. 1400=[M,CD]) is processed correctly. I feel I can start an implementation now. If something becomes more complicated than expected I can slow down and repeat this process. 3. Implement First I write a test for the acceptance test cases. It´s red because there´s no implementation even of the API. That´s in conformance with “TDD lore”, I´d say: Next I implement the API: The acceptance test now is formally correct, but still red of course. This will not change even now that I zoom in. Because my goal is not to most quickly satisfy these tests, but to implement my solution in a stepwise manner. That I do by “faking” it: I just “assume” three functions to represent the transformation process of my solution: My hypothesis is that those three functions in conjunction produce correct results on the API-level. I just have to implement them correctly. That´s what I´m trying now – one by one. I start with a simple “detail function”: Translate(). And I start with all the test cases in the obvious equivalence partition: As you can see I dare to test a private method. Yes. That´s a white box test. But as you´ll see it won´t make my tests brittle. It serves a purpose right here and now: it lets me focus on getting one aspect of my solution right. Here´s the implementation to satisfy the test: It´s as simple as possible. Right how TDD wants me to do it: KISS. Now for the second equivalence partition: translating multiple factors. (It´a pattern: if you need to do something repeatedly separate the tests for doing it once and doing it multiple times.) In this partition I just need a single test case, I guess. Stepping up from a single translation to multiple translations is no rocket science: Usually I would have implemented the final code right away. Splitting it in two steps is just for “educational purposes” here. How small your implementation steps are is a matter of your programming competency. Some “see” the final code right away before their mental eye – others need to work their way towards it. Having two tests I find more important. Now for the next low hanging fruit: compilation. It´s even simpler than translation. A single test is enough, I guess. And normally I would not even have bothered to write that one, because the implementation is so simple. I don´t need to test .NET framework functionality. But again: if it serves the educational purpose… Finally the most complicated part of the solution: finding the factors. There are several equivalence partitions. But still I decide to write just a single test, since the structure of the test data is the same for all partitions: Again, I´m faking the implementation first: I focus on just the first test case. No looping yet. Faking lets me stay on a high level of abstraction. I can write down the implementation of the solution without bothering myself with details of how to actually accomplish the feat. That´s left for a drill down with a test of the fake function: There are two main equivalence partitions, I guess: either the first factor is appropriate or some next. The implementation seems easy. Both test cases are green. (Of course this only works on the premise that there´s always a matching factor. Which is the case since the smallest factor is 1.) And the first of the equivalence partitions on the higher level also is satisfied: Great, I can move on. Now for more than a single factor: Interestingly not just one test becomes green now, but all of them. Great! You might say, then I must have done not the simplest thing possible. And I would reply: I don´t care. I did the most obvious thing. But I also find this loop very simple. Even simpler than a recursion of which I had thought briefly during the problem solving phase. And by the way: Also the acceptance tests went green: Mission accomplished. At least functionality wise. Now I´ve to tidy up things a bit. TDD calls for refactoring. Not uch refactoring is needed, because I wrote the code in top-down fashion. I faked it until I made it. I endured red tests on higher levels while lower levels weren´t perfected yet. But this way I saved myself from refactoring tediousness. At the end, though, some refactoring is required. But maybe in a different way than you would expect. That´s why I rather call it “cleanup”. First I remove duplication. There are two places where factors are defined: in Translate() and in Find_factors(). So I factor the map out into a class constant. Which leads to a small conversion in Find_factors(): And now for the big cleanup: I remove all tests of private methods. They are scaffolding tests to me. They only have temporary value. They are brittle. Only acceptance tests need to remain. However, I carry over the single “digit” tests from Translate() to the acceptance test. I find them valuable to keep, since the other acceptance tests only exercise a subset of all roman “digits”. This then is my final test class: And this is the final production code: Test coverage as reported by NCrunch is 100%: Reflexion Is this the smallest possible code base for this kata? Sure not. You´ll find more concise solutions on the internet. But LOC are of relatively little concern – as long as I can understand the code quickly. So called “elegant” code, however, often is not easy to understand. The same goes for KISS code – especially if left unrefactored, as it is often the case. That´s why I progressed from requirements to final code the way I did. I first understood and solved the problem on a conceptual level. Then I implemented it top down according to my design. I also could have implemented it bottom-up, since I knew some bottom of the solution. That´s the leaves of the functional decomposition tree. Where things became fuzzy, since the design did not cover any more details as with Find_factors(), I repeated the process in the small, so to speak: fake some top level, endure red high level tests, while first solving a simpler problem. Using scaffolding tests (to be thrown away at the end) brought two advantages: Encapsulation of the implementation details was not compromised. Naturally private methods could stay private. I did not need to make them internal or public just to be able to test them. I was able to write focused tests for small aspects of the solution. No need to test everything through the solution root, the API. The bottom line thus for me is: Informed TDD produces cleaner code in a systematic way. It conforms to core principles of programming: Single Responsibility Principle and/or Separation of Concerns. Distinct roles in development – being a researcher, being an engineer, being a craftsman – are represented as different phases. First find what, what there is. Then devise a solution. Then code the solution, manifest the solution in code. Writing tests first is a good practice. But it should not be taken dogmatic. And above all it should not be overloaded with purposes. And finally: moving from top to bottom through a design produces refactored code right away. Clean code thus almost is inevitable – and not left to a refactoring step at the end which is skipped often for different reasons.   PS: Yes, I have done this kata several times. But that has only an impact on the time needed for phases 1 and 2. I won´t skip them because of that. And there are no shortcuts during implementation because of that.

    Read the article

  • MSTest VS2010 - DeploymentItem copying files to different locations on different machines

    - by Jack
    I have found that DeploymentItem [TestClass(), DeploymentItem(@"TestData\")] is not copying my test data files to the same location when tests are built and run on different machines. The test data files are copied to the "bin\debug" directory in the test project on my machine, but on my friend's machine they are copied to "TestResults\*name_machine YY-MM-DD HH_MM_SS*\Out". The bin\debug directory on my machine can be obtained with the code: string appDirectory = Path.GetDirectoryNameSystem.Reflection.Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().Location; and the same code will return "TestResults\*name_machine YY-MM-DD HH_MM_SS*\Out" on my friends PC. This however isn't really the problem. The problem is that the test data files I have made have a folder structure, and this folder structure is only maintained on my machine when copied to bin\debug, whereas on my friends machine only the files are added to the "TestResults\*name_machine YY-MM-DD HH_MM_SS*\Out" directory. This means that tests will pass on my machine and fail on his! Is there a way to ensure that DeploymentItem always copys to the bin\debug folder? Or a way to ensure that the folder structure will be retained when DeploymentItem copies the files to the "TestResults\*name_machine YY-MM-DD HH_MM_SS*\Out" folder?

    Read the article

  • Workflow for academic research projects, one-step builds, and the Joel Test

    - by Steve
    Working alone on academic research sometimes breeds bad habits. With no one else reading my code, I would write a lot of throw-away code, and I would lose track of intermediate results which, weeks or months later, I wish I had retained. My recent attempts to make my personal workflow conform to the Joel Test raised interesting questions. Academic research has inherently different goals than industrial software development, and therefore some aspects of the Joel Test become less valid. Nevertheless, I find these steps to be still valuable for academic research: Do you use source control? Can you make a build in one step? Do you have an up-to-date schedule? Do you have a spec? Of particular use is the one-step build. I find myself more organized now that I have implemented the following "one-step build": In other words, I have a single script, build.py, that accepts Python code, data, and TeX as inputs. The outputs are results, figures, and a paper with all the results filled in. (Yes, I know "build" is probably not accurate in this context, but you get the idea.) By consolidating many small steps into one, I am not backtracking as much as I used to. ...but I'm sure there is still room for improvement. Question: For research projects, which steps of the Joel Test do you still value? Do you have a one-step build? If so, what does yours consist of, i.e., what inputs does it accept, and what output does it generate?

    Read the article

  • Postfix/ClamAV not stopping viruses under Virtualmin

    - by Josh
    I am using Virtualmin and have it set up to have Postfix scan incoming emails with ClamAV (using clamdscan) and delete any emails which contain a virus. However when I email myself the EICAR test string, it comes through just fine. I know ClamAV will report this file as a virus. How can I troubleshoot this / what could be wrong?

    Read the article

  • How to test an HTTP 301 redirect?

    - by NoozNooz42
    How can one easily test HTTP return codes, like, say, a 301 redirect? For example, if I want to "see what's going on", I can use telnet to do something like this: ... $ telnet nytimes.com 80 Trying 199.239.136.200... Connected to nytimes.com. Escape character is '^]'. GET / HTTP/1.0 (enter) (enter) HTTP/1.1 200 OK Server: Sun-ONE-Web-Server/6.1 Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 12:18:04 GMT Content-type: text/html Set-cookie: RMID=007af83f42dd4c161dfcce7d; expires=Tuesday, 14-Jun-2011 12:18:04 GMT; path=/; domain=.nytimes.com Set-cookie: adxcs=-; path=/; domain=.nytimes.com Set-cookie: adxcs=-; path=/; domain=.nytimes.com Set-cookie: adxcs=-; path=/; domain=.nytimes.com Expires: Thu, 01 Dec 1994 16:00:00 GMT Cache-control: no-cache Pragma: no-cache Connection: close <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"> <html> <head> ... Which is an easy way to access quite some infos. But now I want to test that a 301 redirect is indeed a 301 redirect. How can I do so? Basically, instead of getting a HTTP/1.1 200 OK I'd like to know how I can get the 301? I know that I can enter the name of the URL in a browser and "see" that I'm redirected, but I'd like to know what tool(s) can be used to actually really "see" the 301 redirect. Btw, I did test with a telnet, but when I enter www.example.org, which I redirected to example.org (without the www), all I can see is an "200 OK", I don't get to see the 301.

    Read the article

  • Writing PHP extension - Unable to load dynamic library

    - by Luke
    I'm writing a PHP extension similar to V8JS. The goal, like V8JS, is to embed the V8 engine into PHP so I can execute sandboxed JavaScript code in PHP. (The implementation is different.) The extension compiles fine, but when I attempt to run it I get: PHP Warning: PHP Startup: Unable to load dynamic library '/phpdev/lib/php/extensions/debug-zts-20090626/v8php.so' - dlopen(/phpdev/lib/php/extensions/debug-zts-20090626/v8php.so, 9): Symbol not found: __ZN2v88internal8Snapshot13context_size_E Referenced from: /phpdev/lib/php/extensions/debug-zts-20090626/v8php.so Expected in: flat namespace PHP is compiled with the prefix /phpdev (with debug and maintainer flags). v8 is compiled in /v8/ with gyp with the commands make dependencies and make x64 which produced /v8/out/x64.release and /v8/out/x64.debug. I soft-linked the header files from /v8/include to /phpdev/include and libv8_base.a from /v8/out/x64.release/libv8_base.a to /phpdev/lib/libv8.a. This is my config.m4 file: PHP_ARG_ENABLE(v8php, [V8PHP], [--enable-v8php Include V8 JavaScript Engine]) if test $PHP_V8PHP != "no"; then SEARCH_PATH="$prefix /usr/local /usr" SEARCH_FOR="/include/v8.h" if test -r $PHP_V8PHP/$SEARCH_FOR; then V8_DIR=$PHP_V8PHP else AC_MSG_CHECKING([for V8 files in default path]) for i in $SEARCH_PATH ; do if test -r $i/$SEARCH_FOR; then V8_DIR=$i AC_MSG_RESULT(found in $i) fi done fi if test -z "$V8_DIR"; then AC_MSG_RESULT([not found]) AC_MSG_ERROR([Unable to locate V8]) fi PHP_ADD_INCLUDE($V8_DIR/include) PHP_SUBST(V8PHP_SHARED_LIBADD) PHP_ADD_LIBRARY_WITH_PATH(v8, $V8_DIR/$PHP_LIBDIR, V8PHP_SHARED_LIBADD) PHP_REQUIRE_CXX() PHP_NEW_EXTENSION(v8php, v8php.cc v8_class.cc, $ext_shared) fi What am I doing wrong?

    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

  • Using Moq callbacks correctly according to AAA

    - by Hadi Eskandari
    I've created a unit test that tests interactions on my ViewModel class in a Silverlight application. To be able to do this test, I'm mocking the service interface, injected to the ViewModel. I'm using Moq framework to do the mocking. to be able to verify bounded object in the ViewModel is converted properly, I've used a callback: [Test] public void SaveProposal_Will_Map_Proposal_To_WebService_Parameter() { var vm = CreateNewCampaignViewModel(); var proposal = CreateNewProposal(1, "New Proposal"); Services.Setup(x => x.SaveProposalAsync(It.IsAny<saveProposalParam>())).Callback((saveProposalParam p) => { Assert.That(p.plainProposal, Is.Not.Null); Assert.That(p.plainProposal.POrderItem.orderItemId, Is.EqualTo(1)); Assert.That(p.plainProposal.POrderItem.orderName, Is.EqualTo("New Proposal")); }); proposal.State = ObjectStates.Added; vm.CurrentProposal = proposal; vm.Save(); } It is working fine, but if you've noticed, using this mechanism the Assert and Act part of the unit test have switched their parts (Assert comes before Acting). Is there a better way to do this, while preserving correct AAA order?

    Read the article

  • How to unit test this simple ASP.NET MVC controller

    - by Frank Schwieterman
    Lets say I have a simple controller for ASP.NET MVC I want to test. I want to test that a controller action (Foo, in this case) simply returns a link to another action (Bar, in this case). How would you test this? (either the first or second link) My implementation has the same link twice. One passes the url throw ViewData[]. This seems more testable to me, as I can check the ViewData collection returned from Foo(). Even this way though, I don't know how to validate the url itself without making dependencies on routing. The controller: public class TestController : Controller { public ActionResult Foo() { ViewData["Link2"] = Url.Action("Bar"); return View("Foo"); } public ActionResult Bar() { return View("Bar"); } } the "Foo" view: <%@ Page Title="" Language="C#" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage" MasterPageFile="~/Views/Shared/Site.Master"%> <asp:Content ContentPlaceHolderID="MainContent" runat="server"> <%= Html.ActionLink("link 1", "Bar") %> <a href="<%= ViewData["Link2"]%>">link 2</a> </asp:Content>

    Read the article

  • Test multiple domains using ASP.NET development server

    - by Pete Lunenfeld
    I am developing a single web application that will dynamically change its content depending on which domain name is used to reach the site. Multiple domains will point to the same application. I wish to use the following code (or something close) to detect the domain name and perform the customizations: string theDomainName = Request.Url.Host; switch (theDomainName) { case "www.clientone.com": // do stuff break; case "www.clienttwo.com": // do other stuff break; } I would like to test the functionality of the above using the ASP.NET development server. I created mappings in the local HOSTS file to map www.clientone.com to 127.0.0.1, and www.clienttwo.com to 127.0.0.1. I then browse to the application with the browser using www.clinetone.com (etc). When I try to test this code using the ASP.net development server the URL always says localhost. It does NOT capture the host entered in the browser, only localhost. Is there a way to test the URL detection functionality using the development server? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How should I unit test a code-generator?

    - by jkp
    This is a difficult and open-ended question I know, but I thought I'd throw it to the floor and see if anyone had any interesting suggestions. I have developed a code-generator that takes our python interface to our C++ code (generated via SWIG) and generates code needed to expose this as WebServices. When I developed this code I did it using TDD, but I've found my tests to be brittle as hell. Because each test essentially wanted to verify that for a given bit of input code (which happens to be a C++ header) I'd get a given bit of outputted code I wrote a small engine that reads test definitions from XML input files and generates test cases from these expectations. The problem is I dread going in to modify the code at all. That and the fact that the unit tests themselves are a: complex, and b: brittle. So I'm trying to think of alternative approaches to this problem, and it strikes me I'm perhaps tackling it the wrong way. Maybe I need to focus more on the outcome, IE: does the code I generate actually run and do what I want it to, rather than, does the code look the way I want it to. Has anyone got any experiences of something similar to this they would care to share?

    Read the article

  • Maven test dependency in multi module project

    - by user209947
    I use maven to build a multi module project. My module 2 depends on Module 1 src at compile scope and module 1 tests in test scope. Module 2 - <dependency> <groupId>blah</groupId> <artifactId>MODULE1</artifactId> <version>blah</version> <classifier>tests</classifier> <scope>test</scope> </dependency> This works fine. Say my module 3 depends on Module1 src and tests at compile time. Module 3 - <dependency> <groupId>blah</groupId> <artifactId>MODULE1</artifactId> <version>blah</version> <classifier>tests</classifier> <scope>complie</scope> </dependency> When I run mvn clean install, my build runs till module 3, fails at module 3 as it couldnt resolve the module 1 test dependency. Then I do a mvn install on module 3 alone, go back and run mvn install on my parent pom to make it build. How can i fix this?

    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

  • Rails rake test returns an error message

    - by eakkas
    I am a rails newbie and receive the following message when I run rake test. This is a an application based on rails community engine. I tried creating a test application just to make sure that my gems etc. are fine and I am able to run rake test successfully in that application. It would be great if someone could shed a light on what is going wrong... /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.5/lib/active_support/whiny_nil.rb:52:in `method_missing': undefined method `merge' for nil:NilClass (NoMethodError) from /home/eakkas/NetBeansProjects/hello_ce/vendor/plugins/community_engine/app/controllers/users_controller.rb:17 from /usr/local/lib/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:31:in `gem_original_require' from /usr/local/lib/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:31:in `require' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.5/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:158:in `require_without_desert' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/desert-0.5.3/lib/desert/ruby/object.rb:8:in `require' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/desert-0.5.3/lib/desert/ruby/object.rb:32:in `__each_matching_file' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/desert-0.5.3/lib/desert/ruby/object.rb:7:in `require' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.5/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:265:in `require_or_load' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/desert-0.5.3/lib/desert/rails/dependencies.rb:27:in `depend_on' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/desert-0.5.3/lib/desert/rails/dependencies.rb:26:in `each' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/desert-0.5.3/lib/desert/rails/dependencies.rb:26:in `depend_on' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.5/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:136:in `require_dependency' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rails-2.3.5/lib/initializer.rb:414:in `load_application_classes' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rails-2.3.5/lib/initializer.rb:413:in `each' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rails-2.3.5/lib/initializer.rb:413:in `load_application_classes' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rails-2.3.5/lib/initializer.rb:411:in `each' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rails-2.3.5/lib/initializer.rb:411:in `load_application_classes' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rails-2.3.5/lib/initializer.rb:197:in `process' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rails-2.3.5/lib/initializer.rb:113:in `send' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rails-2.3.5/lib/initializer.rb:113:in `run'

    Read the article

  • Why PHPUnit test doesn't fail?

    - by JohnM2
    I have a test method which looks like that: $row = $this->GetRowFromUserTable($id); $this->asserLessThan(time(), time($row['last_update'])); When $row is null access to $row['last_update'] should trigger a NOTICE and this test should fail, but it doesn't. This code fails on first assert, so I know $db_row is null (fixture is the same): $row = $this->GetRowFromUserTable($id); $this->asserNotNull($row); $this->asserLessThan(time(), time($row['last_update'])); When I write this: $row = $this->GetRowFromUserTable($id); $this->assertEquals(E_ALL, error_reporting()); $this->asserLessThan(time(), time($row['last_update'])); it successes, so I am also sure that error_reproting is right and this situation must have something to do with PHPUnit. I use PHPUnit 3.5.6 I read this question: Can I make PHPUnit fail if the code throws a notice? but the answer suggests to use newer version of PHPUnit, but that answer is from 2009, so it's not it. EDIT: I use NetBeans IDE 6.9.1 to run my test.

    Read the article

  • SoapClient throws Wrong version

    - by sivansethu
    When i sending below request, i am getting 'Wrong Version" exception. <OTA_HotelGetMsgRQ xmlns="http://www.opentravel.org/OTA/2003/05" TimeStamp="2001-12-17T09:30:47.0Z" Version="4" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" > <Messages> <Message HotelCode="123" HotelName="Test Hotel" ChainCode="321" ReasonForRequest="Reservation Retrieval" RequestCode="Optional" ChainName="Test Chain" MessageType="All" StartSeqNmbr="1" EndSeqNmbr="10" /> </Messages> </OTA_HotelGetMsgRQ> above request is converted into zend code $client = new zend_soap_client(null, array( 'location' => 'http://url...', 'Uri' =>"http://www.opentravel.org/OTA/2003/05" ) ); $request = array( array('Messages'=> array ('Message' => array ( 'HotelCode' => '123', 'HotelName' => 'Test Hotel', 'ChainCode' => '321', 'ReasonForRequest' => 'Reservation Retrieval', 'RequestCode' => 'Optional', 'ChainName' => 'Test Chain', 'MessageType' => 'All', 'StartSeqNmbr' => '1', 'EndSeqNmbr' => '10' ) ) ) ); $result = $client->OTA_HotelGetMsgRQ ($request); Above line throws exception 'Wrong Version'. Anyone help me how to solve this

    Read the article

  • How to test if a doctrine records has any relations that are used

    - by murze
    Hi, I'm using a doctrine table that has several optional relations (of types Doctrine_Relation_Association and Doctrine_Relation_ForeignKey) with other tables. How can I test if a record from that table has connections with records from the related table. Here is an example to make my question more clear. Assume that you have a User and a user has a many to many relation with Usergroups and a User can have one Userrole How can I test if a give user is part of any Usergroups or has a role. The solution starts I believe with $relations = Doctrine_Core::getTable('User')->getRelations(); $user = Doctrine_Core::getTable('User')->findOne(1); foreach($relations as $relation) { //here should go a test if the user has a related record for this relation if ($relation instanceof Doctrine_Relation_Association) { //here the related table probably has more then one foreign key (ex. user_id and group_id) } if ($relation instanceof Doctrine_Relation_ForeignKey) { //here the related table probably has the primary key of this table (id) as a foreign key (user_id) } } //true or false echo $result I'm looking for a general solution that will work no matter how many relations there are between user and other tables. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How do you test a command object in a grails controller integration test?

    - by egervari
    I'm new to grails. How do I test a form command object to make sure that it's working? Here's some setup code in a test. When I try to do it, I get the following exceptions: Error occurred creating command object. org.codehaus.groovy.grails.web.servlet.mvc.exceptions.ControllerExecutionException: Error occurred creating command object. at sun.reflect.NativeConstructorAccessorImpl.newInstance0(Native Method) .... Caused by: groovy.lang.MissingPropertyException: No such property: password for class: project.user.RegistrationForm Possible solutions: password Here is my test case. As you can see, I set "password" on the params map... void testSaveWhenDataIsCorrect() { controller.params.emailAddress = "[email protected]" controller.params.password = "secret" controller.params.confirmPassword = "secret" controller.save() assertEquals "success", redirectArgs.view ... } Here's the controller action, that adds the command object as a closure parameter: def save = { RegistrationForm form -> if(form.hasErrors()) { render view: "create", model: [form: form] } else { def user = new User(form.properties) user.password = form.encryptedPassword if(user.save()) { redirect(action: "success") } else { render view: "create", model: [form: form] } } } Here's the command object itself... and note that it DOES have a "password" field... class RegistrationForm { def springSecurityService String emailAddress String password String confirmPassword String getEncryptedPassword() { springSecurityService.encodePassword(password) } static constraints = { emailAddress(blank: false, email: true) password(blank: false, size:4..10) confirmPassword(blank: false, validator: { password != confirmPassword }) } } I'm totally lost in the non-intuitive way to do controllers... Please help.

    Read the article

  • Experience with Take home Programming Test for Interviews

    - by Alan
    Okay this is not "programming" related per-se, but it is a situation that I believe the SO audience would be more familiar with, than say an ask.yahoo.com audience, so please forgive me. I had a phone screen the other day with a company that I really want to work for. It went pretty well, based on cues from the HR person, such as "Next step we're going to send you a programming test," and "Well, before I get ahead of myself, do you want to continue the interviewing process." and "We'll send out the test later this afternoon. It doesn't sound like you'll have trouble with it, but I want to be honest we do have a high failure rate on it." The questions asked weren't technical, just going down my resume, and talking about the work I've done, and how it relates to the position. Nothing I couldn't talk through. This was last Thursday. It's now Tuesday, and haven't received the test yet. I sent a follow up email yesterday to the lady who interviewed me, but haven't gotten a response. Anyone had a similar experience? Am I reading too much into this? Or was I off the mark by thinking I had moved on to the next step in the interview process. Since this is a company I really want to work for, I'm driving myself insane enumerating all the various what-if scenarios.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83  | Next Page >