Search Results

Search found 9492 results on 380 pages for 'logic unit'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 80/380 | < Previous Page | 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87  | Next Page >

  • Error using MVCContrib TestHelper

    - by Brian McCord
    While trying to implement the second answer to a previous question, I am receiving an error. I have implemented the methods just as the post shows, and the first three work properly. The fourth one (HomeController_Delete_Action_Handler_Should_Redirect_If_Model_Successfully_Delete) gives this error: Could not find a parameter named 'controller' in the result's Values collection. If I change the code to: actual .AssertActionRedirect() .ToAction("Index"); it works properly, but I don't like the "magic string" in there and prefer to use the lambda method that the other poster used. My controller method looks like this: [HttpPost] public ActionResult Delete(State model) { try { if( model == null ) { return View( model ); } _stateService.Delete( model ); return RedirectToAction("Index"); } catch { return View( model ); } } What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Enforcing an "end" call whenever there is a corresponding "start" call

    - by Jeff Meatball Yang
    Let's say I want to enforce a rule: Everytime you call "StartJumping()" in your function, you must call "EndJumping()" before you return. When a developer is writing their code, they may simply forget to call EndSomething - so I want to make it easy to remember. I can think of only one way to do this: and it abuses the "using" keyword: class Jumper : IDisposable { public Jumper() { Jumper.StartJumping(); } public void Dispose() { Jumper.EndJumping(); } public static void StartJumping() {...} public static void EndJumping() {...} } public bool SomeFunction() { // do some stuff // start jumping... using(Jumper j = new Jumper()) { // do more stuff // while jumping } // end jumping } Is there a better way to do this?

    Read the article

  • Testing if a UI element is hidden in an OCUnit test

    - by Logan Serman
    I have a button that is hidden under certain circumstances that I wish to test. The button is hidden with [theButton setHidden: YES] in the viewDidLoad method if it is appropriate. For simplicity, lets say that the button is hidden when the buttonIsHidden property is set to true in the view controller. Right now I am trying the following: self.viewController = [[ViewController alloc] init]; self.viewController.buttonIsHidden = YES; [self.viewController loadView]; UIButton *theButton = [...] // function I wrote to retrieve the button based on it's touch up inside action if (theButton) { NSLog(@"%c", theButton.hidden); return (theButton.hidden == true) } return NO; It looks like the hidden property is not what it should be, the NSLog lines from the above code are blank. But, if I output another property like the height, it outputs the correct value so I know it is getting the right button. How do I access the hidden property of the button in this case?

    Read the article

  • Which style is preferable when writing this boolean expression?

    - by Jeppe Stig Nielsen
    I know this question is to some degree a matter of taste. I admit this is not something I don't understand, it's just something I want to hear others' opinion about. I need to write a method that takes two arguments, a boolean and a string. The boolean is in a sense (which will be obvious shortly) redundant, but it is part of a specification that the method must take in both arguments, and must raise an exception with a specific message text if the boolean has the "wrong" value. The bool must be true if and only if the string is not null or empty. So here are some different styles to write (hopefully!) the same thing. Which one do you find is the most readable, and compliant with good coding practice? // option A: Use two if, repeat throw statement and duplication of message string public void SomeMethod(bool useName, string name) { if (useName && string.IsNullOrEmpty(name)) throw new SomeException("..."); if (!useName && !string.IsNullOrEmpty(name)) throw new SomeException("..."); // rest of method } // option B: Long expression but using only && and || public void SomeMethod(bool useName, string name) { if (useName && string.IsNullOrEmpty(name) || !useName && !string.IsNullOrEmpty(name)) throw new SomeException("..."); // rest of method } // option C: With == operator between booleans public void SomeMethod(bool useName, string name) { if (useName == string.IsNullOrEmpty(name)) throw new SomeException("..."); // rest of method } // option D1: With XOR operator public void SomeMethod(bool useName, string name) { if (!(useName ^ string.IsNullOrEmpty(name))) throw new SomeException("..."); // rest of method } // option D2: With XOR operator public void SomeMethod(bool useName, string name) { if (useName ^ !string.IsNullOrEmpty(name)) throw new SomeException("..."); // rest of method } Of course you're welcome to suggest other possibilities too. Message text "..." would be something like "If 'useName' is true a name must be given, and if 'useName' is false no name is allowed".

    Read the article

  • defining a simple implicit Arbitary

    - by FredOverflow
    I have a type Foo with a constructor that takes an Int. How do I define an implicit Arbitrary for Foo to be used with scalacheck? implicit def arbFoo: Arbitrary[Foo] = ??? I came up with the following solution, but it's a bit too "manual" and low-level for my taste: val fooGen = for (i <- Gen.choose(Int.MinValue, Int.MaxValue)) yield new Foo(i) implicit def arbFoo: Arbitrary[Foo] = Arbitrary(fooGen) Ideally, I would want a higher-order function where I just have to plug in an Int => Foo function. I managed to cut it down to: implicit def arbFoo = Arbitrary(Gen.resultOf((i: Int) => new Foo(i))) But I still feel like there has got to be a slightly simpler way.

    Read the article

  • Mock a void method which change the input value

    - by Kar
    Hi, How could I mock a void method with parameters and change the value parameters? My void method looks like this: public interface IFoo { void GetValue(int x, object y) // takes x and do something then access another class to get the value of y } I prepared a delegate class: private delegate void GetValueDelegate(int x, object y); private void GetValue(int x, object y) { // process x // prepare a new object obj if (y == null) y = new Object(); if (//some checks) y = obj; } I wrote something like this: Expect.Call(delegate {x.GetValue(5, null);}).Do (new GetValueDelegate(GetValue)).IgnoreArguments().Repeat.Any(); But seems like it's not working. Any clue on what could be wrong?

    Read the article

  • DDSteps date question.

    - by Srini
    DDStep Date Question: Currently trying to pass just the date from excel. But getting the below error while doing it. Failed to convert property value of type [java.lang.String] to required type [java.util.Date] for property ...no matching editors or conversion strategy found spring for date conversion I even tried to add customEditorConfigurer in the ddsteps-context file. Still getting error. But in their pet store example looks like it works fine. Any help is appreciated. <entry key="java.util.Date"> <bean class="org.springframework.beans.propertyeditors.CustomDateEditor"> <constructor-arg> <bean class="java.text.SimpleDateFormat"> <constructor-arg value="yyyy-MM-dd" /> </bean> </constructor-arg> <constructor-arg value="false" /> </bean> </entry>

    Read the article

  • Prolog: using the sort/2 predicate

    - by Øyvind Hauge
    So I'm trying to get rid of the wrapper clause by using the sort library predicate directly inside split. What split does is just generating a list of numbers from a list that looks like this: [1:2,3:2,4:6] ---split-- [1,2,3,2,4,6]. But the generated list contains duplicates, and I don't want that, so I'm using the wrapper to combine split and sort, which then generates the desired result: [1,2,3,4,6]. I'd really like to get rid of the wrapper and just use sort within split, however I keep getting "ERROR: sort/2: Arguments are not sufficiently instantiated." Any ideas? Thanks :) split([],[]). split([H1:H2|T],[H1,H2|NT]) :- split(T,NT). wrapper(L,Processed) :- split(L,L2), sort(L2,Processed).

    Read the article

  • Rhino Mocks - Do we really need stubs?

    - by Marcelo Oliveira
    If it's possible to change mock behaviour in Rhino Mocks using mock.Stub().Return(), why do we need Stubs anyway? What do we lose by always using MockRepository.GenerateMock()? One big benefit of using Mocks instead of Stubs is that we will be able to reuse the same instance among all the tests keeping them cleaner and straightforward. The moq framework works in a similar way... we don't have different objects for mocks and stubs. (please, don't answer with a link to Fowler's "Mocks aren't stubs" article)

    Read the article

  • Is Assert.Fail() considered bad practice?

    - by Mendelt
    I use Assert.Fail a lot when doing TDD. I'm usually working on one test at a time but when I get ideas for things I want to implement later I quickly write an empty test where the name of the test method indicates what I want to implement as sort of a todo-list. To make sure I don't forget I put an Assert.Fail() in the body. When trying out xUnit.Net I found they hadn't implemented Assert.Fail. Of course you can always Assert.IsTrue(false) but this doesn't communicate my intention as well. I got the impression Assert.Fail wasn't implemented on purpose. Is this considered bad practice? If so why? @Martin Meredith That's not exactly what I do. I do write a test first and then implement code to make it work. Usually I think of several tests at once. Or I think about a test to write when I'm working on something else. That's when I write an empty failing test to remember. By the time I get to writing the test I neatly work test-first. @Jimmeh That looks like a good idea. Ignored tests don't fail but they still show up in a separate list. Have to try that out. @Matt Howells Great Idea. NotImplementedException communicates intention better than assert.Fail() in this case @Mitch Wheat That's what I was looking for. It seems it was left out to prevent it being abused in another way I abuse it.

    Read the article

  • Running single test class or group with Surefire and TestNG

    - by Slartibartfast
    I want to run single test class from command line using Maven and TestNG Things that doesn't work: mvn -Dtest=ClassName test I have defined groups in pom.xml, and this class isn't in one of those groups. So it got excluded on those grounds. mvn -Dgroups=skipped-group test mvn -Dsurefire.groups=skipped-group test when config is <plugin> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId> <artifactId>maven-surefire-plugin</artifactId> <version>2.7.1</version> <configuration> <groups>functest</groups> </configuration> </plugin> Parameters work fine in there are no groups defined in pom.xml. Similarly, when surefire is configured with <configuration> <includes> <include>**/*UnitTest.java</include> </includes> </configuration> I can add another test with -Dtest parameter, but cannot add group. In any combination, I can narrow down tests to be executed with groups, but not expand them. What's wrong with my configuration? Is there a way to run a single test or group outside of those defined in pom.xml? Tried on Ubuntu 10.04 with Maven 2.2.1, TestNG 5.14.6 and Surefire 2.7.1

    Read the article

  • Reflection in unit tests for checking code coverage

    - by Gary
    Here's the scenario. I have VO (Value Objects) or DTO objects that are just containers for data. When I take those and split them apart for saving into a DB that (for lots of reasons) doesn't map to the VO's elegantly, I want to test to see if each field is successfully being created in the database and successfully read back in to rebuild the VO. Is there a way I can test that my tests cover every field in the VO? I had an idea about using reflection to iterate through the fields of the VO's as part of the solution, but maybe you guys have solved the problem before? I want this test to fail when I add fields in the VO, and don't remember to add checks for it in my tests.

    Read the article

  • Caching result of setUp() using Python unittest

    - by dbr
    I currently have a unittest.TestCase that looks like.. class test_appletrailer(unittest.TestCase): def setup(self): self.all_trailers = Trailers(res = "720", verbose = True) def test_has_trailers(self): self.failUnless(len(self.all_trailers) > 1) # ..more tests.. This works fine, but the Trailers() call takes about 2 seconds to run.. Given that setUp() is called before each test is run, the tests now take almost 10 seconds to run (with only 3 test functions) What is the correct way of caching the self.all_trailers variable between tests? Removing the setUp function, and doing.. class test_appletrailer(unittest.TestCase): all_trailers = Trailers(res = "720", verbose = True) ..works, but then it claims "Ran 3 tests in 0.000s" which is incorrect.. The only other way I could think of is to have a cache_trailers global variable (which works correctly, but is rather horrible): cache_trailers = None class test_appletrailer(unittest.TestCase): def setUp(self): global cache_trailers if cache_trailers is None: cache_trailers = self.all_trailers = all_trailers = Trailers(res = "720", verbose = True) else: self.all_trailers = cache_trailers

    Read the article

  • Unittest and mock

    - by user1410756
    I'm testing with unittest in python and it's ok. Now, I have introduced mock and I need to resolve a question. This is my code: from mock import Mock import unittest class Matematica(object): def __init__(self, op1, op2): self.op1 = op1 self.op2 = op2 def adder(self): return self.op1 + self.op2 def subs(self): return abs(self.op1 - self.op2) def molt(self): return self.op1 * self.op2 def divid(self): return self.op1 / self.op2 class TestMatematica(unittest.TestCase): """Test della classe Matematica""" def testing(self): """Somma""" mat = Matematica(10,20) self.assertEqual(mat.adder(),30) """Sottrazione""" self.assertEqual(mat.subs(),10) class test_mock(object): def __init__(self, matematica): self.matematica = matematica def execute(self): self.matematica.adder() self.matematica.adder() self.matematica.subs() if __name__ == "__main__": result = unittest.TextTestRunner(verbosity=2).run(TestMatematica('testing')) a = Matematica(10,20) b = test_mock(a) b.execute() mock_foo = Mock(b.execute)#return_value = 'rafa') mock_foo() print mock_foo.called print mock_foo.call_count print mock_foo.method_calls This code is functionally and result of print is: True, 1, [] . Now, I need to count how many times are called self.matematica.adder() and self.matematica.subs() . THANKS

    Read the article

  • Multiple asserts in single test?

    - by Gern Blandston
    Let's say I want to write a function that validates an email address with a regex. I write a little test to check my function and write the actual function. Make it pass. However, I can come up with a bunch of different ways to test the same function ([email protected]; [email protected]; test.test.com, etc). Do I put all the incantations that I need to check in the same, single test with several ASSERTS or do I write a new test for every single thing I can think of? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Java: How to test methods that call System.exit()?

    - by Chris Conway
    I've got a few methods that should call System.exit() on certain inputs. Unfortunately, testing these cases causes JUnit to terminate! Putting the method calls in a new Thread doesn't seem to help, since System.exit() terminates the JVM, not just the current thread. Are there any common patterns for dealing with this? For example, can I subsitute a stub for System.exit()? [EDIT] The class in question is actually a command-line tool which I'm attempting to test inside JUnit. Maybe JUnit is simply not the right tool for the job? Suggestions for complementary regression testing tools are welcome (preferably something that integrates well with JUnit and EclEmma).

    Read the article

  • How do you get the logical xor of two variables in Python?

    - by Zach Hirsch
    How do you get the logical xor of two variables in Python? For example, I have two variables that I expect to be strings. I want to test that only one of them contains a True value (is not None or the empty string): str1 = raw_input("Enter string one:") str2 = raw_input("Enter string two:") if logical_xor(str1, str2): print "ok" else: print "bad" The ^ operator seems to be bitwise, and not defined on all objects: >>> 1 ^ 1 0 >>> 2 ^ 1 3 >>> "abc" ^ "" Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for ^: 'str' and 'str'

    Read the article

  • Wrapping text and div as a unit

    - by mathee
    I have the following that I would like wrapped as units. <div class='tag-box'> <a href=#>Axe Committee</a> <div class='circle'><a href=#>x</a></div> </div> The CSS for these classes are: .tag-box { display:inline; } .circle { display:inline; padding-left:4px; padding-right:4px; background:rgb(196,15,24); /*dark red*/ -moz-border-radius:10px; -webkit-border-radius:10px; } .circle a { font-size:10px; text-decoration:none; color:#fff; position:relative; top:-2px; } I can have upwards of 20 or 30 of these tag-boxes displayed inline. The problem is that the wrapping will break the words from each other or even break the red circle from the link. This makes it hard to differentiate which circle belongs to which link. (In the future, each circle corresponds to a different action with respect to the link.) See below. How do I prevent this kind of wrapping from occurring?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87  | Next Page >