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 87/380 | < Previous Page | 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94  | Next Page >

  • In-memory data structure that supports boolean querying

    - by sanity
    I need to store data in memory where I map one or more key strings to an object, as follows: "green", "blue" -> object1 "red", "yellow" -> object2 I need to be able to efficiently receive a list of objects, where the strings match some boolean criteria, such as: ("red" OR "green") AND NOT "blue" I'm working in Java, so the ideal solution would be an off-the-shelf Java library. I am, however, willing to implement something from scratch if necessary. Anyone have any ideas? I'd rather avoid the overhead of an in-memory database if possible, I'm hoping for something comparable in speed to a HashMap (or at least the same order of magnitude).

    Read the article

  • Testing Hibernate DAO, without building the universe around it.

    - by Varun Mehta
    We have an application built using spring/Hibernate/MySQL, now we want to test the DAO layer, but here are a few shortcomings we face. Consider the use case of multiple objects connected to one another, eg: Book has Pages. The Page object cannot exist without the Book as book_id is mandatory FK in Page. For testing a Page I have to create a Book. This simple usecase is easy to manage, but if you start building a Library, till you don't create the whole universe surrounding the Book and Page, you cannot test it! So to test Page; Create Library Create Section Create Genre Create Author Create Book Create Page Now test Page. Is there an easy way to by pass this "universe creation" and just test he page object in isolation. I also want to be able to test HQLs related to Page. eg: SELECT new com.test.BookPage (book.id, page.name) FROM Book book, Page page. JUnit is supposed to run in isolation, so I have to write the whole test case to create the Page. Any tips will be useful.

    Read the article

  • How to emulate onLowMemory()?

    - by Samuh
    I have put some instructions in onLowMemory() callback and want to test the same. Is there a "direct" way to test onLowMemory function of the application subclass? Or will I have to just overload the phone by starting many apps and doing memory intensive tasks? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • SQL - logical AND among multiple rows

    - by potrnd
    Hello, First of all sorry that I could not think of a more descriptive title. What I want to do is the following using only SQL: I have some lists of strings, list1, list2 and list3. I have a dataset that contains two interesting columns, A and B. Column A contains a TransactionID and column B contains an ItemID. Naturally, there can be multiple rows that share the same TransactionIDs. I need to catch those transactions that have at least one item ID that exists whithin each list (list1, list2 AND list3). I also need to count how many times does that happen for each transaction. I hope that makes enough sense, perhaps I will be able to explain it better with a clear head. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Junit | How to test parameters in a method

    - by MMRUser
    How do I test parameters inside a method itself. For example class TestClass { public void paraMethod(String para1, String para2) { String testPara1 = para1; String testPara2 = para2; } } class TestingClass { @Test public void testParaMethod () throws Exception { String myPara1 = "MyPara1"; String myPara2 = "MyPara2"; new TestClass().paraMethod(myPara1, myPara2); } } Ok, so is it possible to test if the testPara1 and testPara2 are properly set to the values that I have passed? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to keep the first result of a function from Prolog?

    - by zuhakasa
    I need to write a customized function that will be called many times by other fixed functions. In this function, at the first called time, it will return the total number of lines of a file. The second called time of this function, forward, will return the number of lines in small sections of this file. My question is how I keep the first returned result(total number of lines of a file) and use it for the next called times of my function. I need to write or declare any thing only in this function(not in the caller). Something like this: myFunction(Input, MyResult, FirstResult) :- calculateInputFunction(Input, Result), !, MyResult is Result, ... . The problem is, every time myFunction is called, it receives different Input and returns different MyResult. But I would like to keep the first MyResult to use for next called times of myFunction. How can I do that? Thanks very much for your answer in advance.

    Read the article

  • Python/Django tests running only one test at a time

    - by user2876296
    I have a unittest for my view class TestFromAllAdd(TestCase): fixtures = ['staging_accounts_user.json', 'staging_main_category.json', 'staging_main_dashboard.json', 'staging_main_location.json', 'staging_main_product.json', 'staging_main_shoppinglist.json'] def setUp(self): self.factory = RequestFactory() self.c = Client() self.c.login(username='admin', password='admin') def from_all_products_html404_test(self): request = self.factory.post('main/adding_from_all_products', {'product_id': ''}) request.user = User.objects.get(username= 'admin') response = adding_from_all_products(request) self.assertEqual(response.status_code, 404) But I have a few more classes with tests and I cant run them all at the same time: python manage.py test main doesnt run tests, but if i run; python manage.py test main.TestFromAllAdd.from_all_products_html404_test , runs one test;

    Read the article

  • Cannot execute newly created TestMethod in VS2010

    - by FrontSvin
    When I try to run a new TestMethod on an existing TestClass in Visual Studio 2010 (by right-clicking on the method name and choosing Run Tests) the test method does not execute. After a restart of VS, the problem has gone. Am I missing some refresh thing, or is right-clicking even the correct way of executing a single test method?

    Read the article

  • Keeping iPhone App private after AppStore approval for beta testing.

    - by Stack
    I have messed around with AD-HOC distribution quite a bit and got it working too. The problem I am facing is all the people who I want to use as beta testers are "normal people" who never even sync their iPhone to iTunes on a computer. So, you can understand how technically challenged these people are, which is fine with me because that is the audience I want to use for testing. All these guys can do for me is if I can give them an AppStore link they will download it on their iPhone and test it for me. So, basically AD-HOC distribution (UDIDs, mobileprovision file and all that crap) is out of question for me. My Question is after AppStore approves my app, is there a way for me to be under the radar so that normal public can not download the app until I am ready. From past experience I know that the moment you put an app out there, in first week you get 100s of downloads and I dont want that to happen until my beta testing is finished.

    Read the article

  • Why Create Mock Objects?

    - by Chris
    During a recent interview I was asked why one would want to create mock objects. My answer went something like, "Take a database--if you're writing test code, you may not want that test hooked up live to the production database where actual operations will be performed." Judging by response, my answer clearly was not what the interviewer was looking for. What's a better answer?

    Read the article

  • How to make an unit test always pass?

    - by brain_damage
    Let's assume someone has to write a solution to a problem and I have to test his solution with some tests. Is it possible (maybe with reflections or something) his program to pass all my tests, but to have nothing in common with the real solution to the problem?

    Read the article

  • JUnit - assertSame

    - by Michael
    Can someone tell me why assertSame() do fail when I use values 127? import static org.junit.Assert.*; ... @Test public void StationTest1() { .. assertSame(4, 4); // OK assertSame(10, 10); // OK assertSame(100, 100); // OK assertSame(127, 127); // OK assertSame(128, 128); // raises an junit.framework.AssertionFailedError! assertSame(((int) 128),((int) 128)); // also junit.framework.AssertionFailedError! } I'm using JUnit 4.8.1.

    Read the article

  • Using Moq to Validate Separate Invocations with Distinct Arguments

    - by Thermite
    I'm trying to validate the values of arguments passed to subsequent mocked method invocations (of the same method), but cannot figure out a valid approach. A generic example follows: public class Foo { [Dependency] public Bar SomeBar { get; set; } public void SomeMethod() { this.SomeBar.SomeOtherMethod("baz"); this.SomeBar.SomeOtherMethod("bag"); } } public class Bar { public void SomeOtherMethod(string input) { } } public class MoqTest { [TestMethod] public void RunTest() { Mock<Bar> mock = new Mock<Bar>(); Foo f = new Foo(); mock.Setup(m => m.SomeOtherMethod(It.Is<string>("baz"))); mock.Setup(m => m.SomeOtherMethod(It.Is<string>("bag"))); // this of course overrides the first call f.SomeMethod(); mock.VerifyAll(); } } Using a Function in the Setup might be an option, but then it seems I'd be reduced to some sort of global variable to know which argument/iteration I'm verifying. Maybe I'm overlooking the obvious within the Moq framework?

    Read the article

  • Application test recommendation

    - by Polaris
    I never use unitests in my apps . I know that exists many technologies for testing .NET based application. (For example NUnit). Which of this tools more comfortable and more understandable to use. Please can you show the good articles where can I find information about unitests and understand key situation where I must use them?

    Read the article

  • MYSQL question - AND or OR?

    - by U22199
    Which is a better way to select ans and quest from the table? SELECT * FROM tablename WHERE option='ans' OR option='quest'"; OR SELECT * FROM tablename WHERE option='ans' AND option='quest'"; Thanks so much!

    Read the article

  • Unit Conversion from feet to meters

    - by user1742419
    I have to write a program that reads in a length in feet and inches and outputs the equivalent length in meters and centimeters. I have to create three functions: one for input, one or more for calculating, and one for output; And include a loop that lets the user repeat this computation for new input values until the user says he or she wants to end the program. I can't seem to get the input from one function to be used in the conversion function and then outputted by the next function. How do I do that? Thank you. #include <iostream> #include <conio.h> using namespace std; double leng; void length(double leng); double conv(double leng); void output(double leng); int main() { length(leng); conv(leng); output(leng); _getche(); return 0; } void length(double leng) { cout<<"Enter a length in feet, then enter a length in inches if needed: "; cin>>leng; return; } double conv(double leng) { return leng = leng * .3048; } void output(double leng) { cout<<"Your input is converted to "<<leng; return; }

    Read the article

  • Catch test case order [on hold]

    - by DeadMG
    Can I guarantee the order of execution with multiple TEST_CASEs with Catch? I am testing some code using LLVM, and they have some despicable global state that I need to explicitly initialize. Right now I have one test case that's like this: TEST_CASE("", "") { // Initialize really shitty LLVM global variables. llvm::InitializeAllTargets(); llvm::InitializeAllTargetMCs(); llvm::InitializeAllAsmPrinters(); llvm::InitializeNativeTarget(); llvm::InitializeAllAsmParsers(); // Some per-test setup I can make into its own function CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile(...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Compile...)); CHECK_NOTHROW(Interpret(...)); CHECK_THROWS(Compile(...)); CHECK_THROWS(Compile(...)); } What I want is to refactor it into three TEST_CASE, one for tests that should pass compilation, one for tests that should fail, and -one for tests that should pass interpretation (and in the future, further such divisions, perhaps). But I can't simply move the test contents into another TEST_CASE because if that TEST_CASE is called before the one that sets up the inconvenient globals, then they won't be initialized and the testing will spuriously fail.

    Read the article

  • Unit testing is… well, flawed.

    - by Dewald Galjaard
    Hey someone had to say it. I clearly recall my first IT job. I was appointed Systems Co-coordinator for a leading South African retailer at store level. Don’t get me wrong, there is absolutely nothing wrong with an honest day’s labor and in fact I highly recommend it, however I’m obliged to refer to the designation cautiously; in reality all I had to do was monitor in-store prices and two UNIX front line controllers. If anything went wrong – I only had to phone it in… Luckily that wasn’t all I did. My duties extended to some other interesting annual occurrence – stock take. Despite a bit more curious affair, it was still a tedious process that took weeks of preparation and several nights to complete.  Then also I remember that no matter how elaborate our planning was, the entire exercise would be rendered useless if we couldn’t get the basics right – that being the act of counting. Sounds simple right? We’ll with a store which could potentially carry over tens of thousands of different items… we’ll let’s just say I believe that’s when I first became a coffee addict. In those days the act of counting stock was a very humble process. Nothing like we have today. A staff member would be assigned a bin or shelve filled with items he or she had to sort then count. Thereafter they had to record their findings on a complementary piece of paper. Every night I would manage several teams. Each team was divided into two groups - counters and auditors. Both groups had the same task, only auditors followed shortly on the heels of the counters, recounting stock levels, making sure the original count correspond to their findings. It was a simple yet hugely responsible orchestration of people and thankfully there was one fundamental and golden rule I could always abide by to ensure things run smoothly – No-one was allowed to audit their own work. Nope, not even on nights when I didn’t have enough staff available. This meant I too at times had to get up there and get counting, or have the audit stand over until the next evening. The reason for this was obvious - late at night and with so much to do we were prone to make some mistakes, then on the recount, without a fresh set of eyes, you were likely to repeat the offence. Now years later this rule or guideline still holds true as we develop software (as far removed as software development from counting stock may be). For some reason it is a fundamental guideline we’re simply ignorant of. We write our code, we write our tests and thus commit the same horrendous offence. Yes, the procedure of writing unit tests as practiced in most development houses today – is flawed. Most if not all of the tests we write today exercise application logic – our logic. They are based on the way we believe an application or method should/may/will behave or function. As we write our tests, our unit tests mirror our best understanding of the inner workings of our application code. Unfortunately these tests will therefore also include (or be unaware of) any imperfections and errors on our part. If your logic is flawed as you write your initial code, chances are, without a fresh set of eyes, you will commit the same error second time around too. Not even experience seems to be a suitable solution. It certainly helps to have deeper insight, but is that really the answer we should be looking for? Is that really failsafe? What about code review? Code review is certainly an answer. You could have one developer coding away and another (or team) making sure the logic is sound. The practice however has its obvious drawbacks. Firstly and mainly it is resource intensive and from what I’ve seen in most development houses, given heavy deadlines, this guideline is seldom adhered to. Hardly ever do we have the resources, money or time readily available. So what other options are out there? A quest to find some solution revealed a project by Microsoft Research called PEX. PEX is a framework which creates several test scenarios for each method or class you write, automatically. Think of it as your own personal auditor. Within a few clicks the framework will auto generate several unit tests for a given class or method and save them to a single project. PEX help to audit your work. It lends a fresh set of eyes to any project you’re working on and best of all; it is cost effective and fast. Check them out at http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/pex/ In upcoming posts we’ll dive deeper into how it works and how it can help you.   Certainly there are more similar frameworks out there and I would love to hear from you. Please share your experiences and insights.

    Read the article

  • How to create conditional If / Else logic in a BizTalk map.

    How to create conditional logic in a BizTalk map using out of the box functoids. Example takes in a Xml file containing Films and their receipts and create a destination file whose structure id dependent on the incoming data.  read moreBy BiZTech KnowDid you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • Python: Inheritance of a class attribute (list)

    - by Sano98
    Hi everyone, inheriting a class attribute from a super class and later changing the value for the subclass works fine: class Unit(object): value = 10 class Archer(Unit): pass print Unit.value print Archer.value Archer.value = 5 print Unit.value print Archer.value leads to the output: 10 10 10 5 which is just fine: Archer inherits the value from Unit, but when I change Archer's value, Unit's value remains untouched. Now, if the inherited value is a list, the shallow copy effect strikes and the value of the superclass is also affected: class Unit(object): listvalue = [10] class Archer(Unit): pass print Unit.listvalue print Archer.listvalue Archer.listvalue[0] = 5 print Unit.listvalue print Archer.listvalue Output: 10 10 5 5 Is there a way to "deep copy" a list when inheriting it from the super class? Many thanks Sano

    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 | 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94  | Next Page >