Search Results

Search found 6839 results on 274 pages for 'functional tests'.

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 9/274 | < Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >

  • How To Run integrational Tests

    - by Vladimir
    In our project we have a plenty of Unit Tests. They help to keep project rather well-tested. Besides them we have a set of tests which are unit tests, but depends on some kind of external resource. We call them external tests. They can access web-service sometimes or similar. While unit tests is easy to run the integrational tests couldn't pass sometimes - for example due to timeout error. Also these tests can take too much time to run. Currently we keep integration/external unit tests just to run them when developing corresponding functionality. For plain unit tests we use TeamCIty for continuous integration. How do you run the integration unit tests and when do you run them?

    Read the article

  • assistance with classifying tests

    - by amateur
    I have a .net c# library that I have created that I am currently creating some unit tests for. I am at present writing unit tests for a cache provider class that I have created. Being new to writing unit tests I have 2 questions These being: My cache provider class is the abstraction layer to my distributed cache - AppFabric. So to test aspects of my cache provider class such as adding to appfabric cache, removing from cache etc involves communicating with appfabric. Therefore the tests to test for such, are they still categorised as unit tests or integration tests? The above methods I am testing due to interacting with appfabric, I would like to time such methods. If they take longer than a specified benchmark, the tests have failed. Again I ask the question, can this performance benchmark test be classifed as a unit test? The way I have my tests set up I want to include all unit tests together, integration tests together etc, therefore I ask these questions that I would appreciate input on.

    Read the article

  • What's the proper term for a function inverse to a constructor - to unwrap a value from a data type?

    - by Petr Pudlák
    Edit: I'm rephrasing the question a bit. Apparently I caused some confusion because I didn't realize that the term destructor is used in OOP for something quite different - it's a function invoked when an object is being destroyed. In functional programming we (try to) avoid mutable state so there is no such equivalent to it. (I added the proper tag to the question.) Instead, I've seen that the record field for unwrapping a value (especially for single-valued data types such as newtypes) is sometimes called destructor or perhaps deconstructor. For example, let's have (in Haskell): newtype Wrap = Wrap { unwrap :: Int } Here Wrap is the constructor and unwrap is what? The questions are: How do we call unwrap in functional programming? Deconstructor? Destructor? Or by some other term? And to clarify, is this/other terminology applicable to other functional languages, or is it used just in the Haskell? Perhaps also, is there any terminology for this in general, in non-functional languages? I've seen both terms, for example: ... Most often, one supplies smart constructors and destructors for these to ease working with them. ... at Haskell wiki, or ... The general theme here is to fuse constructor - deconstructor pairs like ... at Haskell wikibook (here it's probably meant in a bit more general sense), or newtype DList a = DL { unDL :: [a] -> [a] } The unDL function is our deconstructor, which removes the DL constructor. ... in The Real World Haskell.

    Read the article

  • Is this method of writing Unit Tests correct?

    - by aspdotnetuser
    I have created a small C# project to help me learn how to write good unit tests. I know that one important rule of unit testing is to test the smallest 'unit' of code possible so that if it fails you know exactly what part of the code needs to fixed. I need help with the following before I continue to implement more unit tests for the project: If I have a Car class, for example, that creates a new Car object which has various attributes that are calculated when its' constructor method is called, would the two following tests be considered as overkill? Should there be one test that tests all calculated attributes of the Car object instead? [Test] public void CarEngineCalculatedValue() { BusinessObjects.Car car= new BusinessObjects.Car(); Assert.GreaterOrEqual(car.Engine, 1); } [Test] public void CarNameCalculatedValue() { BusinessObjects.Car car= new BusinessObjects.Car(); Assert.IsNotNull(car.Name); } Should I have the above two test methods to test these things or should I have one test method that asserts the Car object has first been created and then test these things in the same test method?

    Read the article

  • reinventing the wheels: Node.JS/Event-driven programming v.s. Functional Programming?

    - by ivanTheTerrible
    Now there's all the hype lately about Node.JS, an event driven framework using Javascript callbacks. To my limited understanding, its primary advantage seems to be that you don't have to wait step by step sequentially (for example, you can fetch the SQL results, while calling other functions too). So my question is: how is this different, or better than just functional languages, like CL, Haskell, Clojure etc? If not better, then why don't people just do functional languages then (instead of reinventing the wheel with Javascript)? Please note that I have none experience in either Node.JS nor functional programming. So some basic explanation can be helpful.

    Read the article

  • Why is writing a compiler in a functional language so efficient and easier?

    - by wvd
    Hello all, I've been thinking of this question very long, but really couldn't find the answer on Google as well a similar question on Stackoverflow. If there is a duplicate, I'm sorry for that. A lot of people seem to say that writing compilers and other language tools in functional languages such as OCaml and Haskell is much more efficient and easier then writing them in imperative languages. Is this true? And if so -- why is so efficient and easy to write them in functional languages instead of in an imperative language, like C? Also -- isn't a language tool in a functional language slower then in some low-level language like C? Thanks in advance, William v. Doorn

    Read the article

  • Why is writing a compiler in a functional language easier?

    - by wvd
    Hello all, I've been thinking of this question very long, but really couldn't find the answer on Google as well a similar question on Stackoverflow. If there is a duplicate, I'm sorry for that. A lot of people seem to say that writing compilers and other language tools in functional languages such as OCaml and Haskell is much more efficient and easier then writing them in imperative languages. Is this true? And if so -- why is it so efficient and easy to write them in functional languages instead of in an imperative language, like C? Also -- isn't a language tool in a functional language slower then in some low-level language like C? Thanks in advance, William v. Doorn

    Read the article

  • unit testing variable state explicit tests in dynamically typed languages

    - by kris welsh
    I have heard that a desirable quality of unit tests is that they test for each scenario independently. I realised whilst writing tests today that when you compare a variable with another value in a statement like: assertEquals("foo", otherObject.stringFoo); You are really testing three things: The variable you are testing exists and is within scope. The variable you are testing is the expected type. The variable you are testing's value is what you expect it to be. Which to me raises the question of whether you should test for each of these implicitly so that a test fail would occur on the specific line that tests for that problem: assertTrue(stringFoo); assertTrue(stringFoo.typeOf() == "String"); assertEquals("foo", otherObject.stringFoo); For example if the variable was an integer instead of a string the test case failure would be on line 2 which would give you more feedback on what went wrong. Should you test for this kind of thing explicitly or am i overthinking this?

    Read the article

  • Isolated Unit Tests and Fine Grained Failures

    - by Winston Ewert
    One of the reasons often given to write unit tests which mock out all dependencies and are thus completely isolated is to ensure that when a bug exists, only the unit tests for that bug will fail. (Obviously, an integration tests may fail as well). That way you can readily determine where the bug is. But I don't understand why this is a useful property. If my code were undergoing spontaneous failures, I could see why its useful to readily identify the failure point. But if I have a failing test its either because I just wrote the test or because I just modified the code under test. In either case, I already know which unit contains a bug. What is the useful in ensuring that a test only fails due to bugs in the unit under test? I don't see how it gives me any more precision in identifying the bug than I already had.

    Read the article

  • Are unit tests really used as documentation?

    - by stijn
    I cannot count the number of times I read statements in the vein of 'unit tests are a very important source of documentation of the code under test'. I do not deny they are true. But personally I haven't found myself using them as documentation, ever. For the typical frameworks I use, the method declarations document their behaviour and that's all I need. And I assume the unit tests backup everything stated in that documentation, plus likely some more internal stuff, so on one side it duplicates the ducumentation while on the other it might add some more that is irrelevant. So the question is: when are unit tests used as documentation? When the comments do not cover everything? By developpers extending the source? And what do they expose that can be useful and relevant that the documentation itself cannot expose?

    Read the article

  • Problems with data driven testing in MSTest

    - by severj3
    Hello, I am trying to get data driven testing to work in C# with MSTest/Selenium. Here is a sample of some of my code trying to set it up: [TestClass] public class NewTest { private ISelenium selenium; private StringBuilder verificationErrors; [DeploymentItem("GoogleTestData.xls")] [DataSource("System.Data.OleDb", "Provider=Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0;Data Source=GoogleTestData.xls;Persist Security Info=False;Extended Properties='Excel 8.0'", "TestSearches$", DataAccessMethod.Sequential)] [TestMethod] public void GoogleTest() { selenium = new DefaultSelenium("localhost", 4444, "*iehta", http://www.google.com); selenium.Start(); verificationErrors = new StringBuilder(); var searchingTerm = TestContext.DataRow["SearchingString"].ToString(); var expectedResult = TestContext.DataRow["ExpectedTextResults"].ToString(); Here's my error: Error 3 An object reference is required for the non-static field, method, or property 'Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting.TestContext.DataRow.get' E:\Projects\SeleniumProject\SeleniumProject\MaverickTest.cs 32 33 SeleniumProject The error is underlining the "TestContext.DataRow" part of both statements. I've really been struggling with this one, thanks!

    Read the article

  • Functional testing in the verification

    - by user970696
    Yesterday my question How come verification does not include actual testing? created a lot of controversy, yet did not reveal the answer for related and very important question: does black box functional testing done by testers belong to verification or validation? ISO 12207:12208 here mentiones testing explicitly only as a validation activity, however, it speaks about validation of requirements of the intended use. For me its more high level, like UAT test cases written by business users ISO mentioned above does not mention any specific verification (7.2.4.3.2)except for Requirement verification, Design verification, Document and Code & Integration verification. The last two can be probably thought as unit and integrated testing. But where is then the regular testing done by testers at the end of the phase? The book I mentioned in the original question mentiones that verification is done by static techniques, yet on the V model graph it describes System testing against high level description as a verification, mentioning it includes all kinds of testing like functional, load etc. In the IEEE standard for V&V, you can read this: Even though the tests and evaluations are not part of the V&V processes, the techniques described in this standard may be useful in performing them. So that is different than in ISO, where validation mentiones testing as the activity. Not to mention a lot of contradicting information on the net. I would really appreciate a reference to e.g. a standard in the answer or explanation of what I missed in the ISO. For me, I am unable to tell where the testers work belong.

    Read the article

  • functional requirements - use wording based on verbs?

    - by yas
    Question: Should the functional requirements in a requirements doc use wording based on verbs? Context: School assignment, working in a team, working through the SDLC. The requirements doc has been done and we are now into design. Problem: The requirements doc has an enumerated list of what I'd call features of the app - the functional requirements. In that list are things that I'd think of as "how's" rather than "what's" and now, trying to work on design, I feel like a part of design has been prematurely dictated. I've not done this before! To me, I should be dealing strictly with things that describe "what." Example of current: Pretend that the job is to make an omelet. Listing: crack the egg, break into bowl, scramble, etc.; crosses over the line into the territory of how. Along that track, so does wording like: create, generate, list, calculate, determine, validate, etc. - verbs, basically. Right now, I have a list of requirements that are partially rooted in verbs. My idea of a requirements doc for an omelet would be more like: has two eggs, x ounces of ham, x ounces of bacon, x ounces of montery-jack cheese, x ounces of cilantro, etc. - nothing but what (nouns). I might have, and could have, spoken up before finalizing the requirements doc if I'd had any experience.

    Read the article

  • Which term to use when referring to functional data structures: persistent or immutable?

    - by Bob
    In the context of functional programming which is the correct term to use: persistent or immutable? When I Google "immutable data structures" I get a Wikipedia link to an article on "Persistent data structure" which even goes on to say: such data structures are effectively immutable Which further confuses things for me. Do functional programs rely on persistent data structures or immutable data structures? Or are they always the same thing?

    Read the article

  • Do you use Python mostly for its functional or object-oriented features?

    - by Eric
    I see what seems like a majority of Python developers on StackOverflow endorsing the use of concise functional tools like lambdas, maps, filters, etc., while others say their code is clearer and more maintainable by not using them. What is your preference? Also, if you are a die-hard functional programmer or hardcore into OO, what other specific programming practices do you use that you think are best for your style? Thanks in advance for your opinions!

    Read the article

  • How to unit test image processing code?

    - by rold2007
    I'm working in image processing (mainly OCR) and I wonder how I should integrate unit tests in my development. I'm already using unit tests for more "common" type of code but when dealing with image processing code I'm not sure how to deal with it. This kind of code always need some image data input/output and mocking this is not obvious. For now I'm mostly doing integration tests but they take a while to run and I would like some ideas on how to break down this kind of code into unit tests so that I can run them more quickly.

    Read the article

  • How do I explain what's good about F#?

    - by Ramon Snir
    Many people ask me to explain to them why is F# (or other functional languages) better (or different) than other languages they know (like Java, C#, C++). Until today, I either tried showing few examples or using longs scary words or lending Tomas Petricek's book, but I find those ways either time consuming or unclear. Is there a simple(r) way to explain functional programming to imperative programmers?

    Read the article

  • sorl-thumbnail unit tests fail by 1 pixel (!)

    - by stevejalim
    Hi I'm using sorl-thumbnail in a Django 1.2 (currently 1.2 RC) project and getting a surprising failure of four of sorl's built-in unit tests. Essentially, the resized images are all 1px shorter than the unit tests expect them to be. See below for details I'm developing on OSX 10.5.8 (not Snow Leopard) with Python 2.5.1 (r251:54863, Feb 6 2009, 19:02:12) and PIL 1.1.6. Any thoughts what might be up? Cheers Steve ====================================================================== FAIL: test_extension (sorl.thumbnail.tests.fields.FieldTest) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/local/django/myprojectnamehere/lib/sorl/thumbnail/tests/fields.py", line 66, in test_extension self.verify_thumbnail((50, 37), thumb, expected_filename) File "/usr/local/django/myprojectnamehere/lib/sorl/thumbnail/tests/base.py", line 92, in verify_thumbnail self.assertEqual(image.size, expected_size) AssertionError: (50, 38) != (50, 37) ====================================================================== FAIL: test_thumbnail (sorl.thumbnail.tests.fields.ImageWithThumbnailsFieldTest) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/local/django/myprojectnamehere/lib/sorl/thumbnail/tests/fields.py", line 111, in test_thumbnail self.verify_thumbnail((50, 37), thumb, expected_filename) File "/usr/local/django/myprojectnamehere/lib/sorl/thumbnail/tests/base.py", line 92, in verify_thumbnail self.assertEqual(image.size, expected_size) AssertionError: (50, 38) != (50, 37) ====================================================================== FAIL: testTag (sorl.thumbnail.tests.templatetags.ThumbnailTagTest) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/local/django/myprojectnamehere/lib/sorl/thumbnail/tests/templatetags.py", line 118, in testTag self.verify_thumbnail((90, 67), expected_filename=expected_fn) File "/usr/local/django/myprojectnamehere/lib/sorl/thumbnail/tests/base.py", line 92, in verify_thumbnail self.assertEqual(image.size, expected_size) AssertionError: (90, 68) != (90, 67)

    Read the article

  • Best (functional?) programming language to learn coming from Mathematica

    - by Will Robertson
    As a mechanical engineering PhD student, I haven't had a great pedigree in programming as part of my “day job”. I started out in Matlab (having written some Hypercard and Applescript back in the day, and being introduced to Ada, of all things, in my 1st undergrad year), learned to program—if you can call it that—in (La)TeX; and finally discovered and fell for Mathematica. Now I'm interested in learning a "real" programming language that I can enjoy in the same sort of style as Mathematica, which tries to stress functional programming since it seems to map more nicely to how certain kinds of mathematics can be written algorithmically. So which functional language should I learn? I guess the obvious answer is “as many as possible”, but let's start out humble and give a single, well-considered option a good crack. I've heard good things about, say, Haskell and Scala, but I wonder if (given my non–computer science background) I'd be better off starting in more “grounded” territory and going with Ruby or Python (the latter having the big advantage of being used for Sage, which I'd also like to investigate…after my PhD). Well, I guess this is pretty subjective, so perhaps I could rephrase: would it be better to start looking at Haskell (say) straight after an ad-hoc education to functional programming in Mathematica, or will I get more out of learning Python (say) first? In reference to the question "what do I want to do with it?", I guess my answer is "fun, and learning more". I've got this list of languages that I'd like to look at, and I don't know how to trim them down. And I'd rather start with something a little higher-level than C simply so that I can be somewhat productive without having to re-invent many wheels for any code I'd like to write.

    Read the article

  • Cuppa Corner talk "A trip to First Normal Form" available - Domains, Functional Dependencies, Repeat

    - by tonyrogerson
    It's 15 minutes, I talk about Domains, Functional Dependencies, Repeating Groups, Relational Valued Attributes and of course First Normal Form. http://sqlcontent.sqlblogcasts.com/video/cctr20100507dbdesign1nf/cctr20100507dbdesign1nf.html For questions just ask on the http://sqlserverfaq.com chat control or Twitter using #sqlfaq tag. Slides are also availble here: http://sqlcontent.sqlblogcasts.com/video/cctr20100507dbdesign1nf/cc_tr20100507_dbdesign1nf.pptx...(read more)

    Read the article

  • [News] Tests robotis?s avec Selenium et xUnit

    Dans ce billet, joel abrahamsson illustre un cas concret d'utilisation de l'outil de tests d'IHM, Selenium, avec C# : "I have really enjoyed playing around with Selenium and I?m quite sure that I will start using it at work as well. I?m also quite happy with how my tests work and how I handle starting Selenium Server and I hope that this post will prove useful to others as well"

    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 | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >