Search Results

Search found 5783 results on 232 pages for 'translation 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 9/232 | < Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >

  • Boost Unit testing memory reuse causing tests that should fail to pass

    - by Knyphe
    We have started using the boost unit testing library for a large existing code base, and I have run into some trouble with unit tests incorrectly passing, seemingly due to the reuse of memory on the stack. Here is my situation: BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(test_select_base_instantiation_default) { SelectBase selectBase(); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getSelectType(), false); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getTypeName(_T("")); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getEntityType(), -1); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getDataPos(), -1); } BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(test_select_base_instantiation_default) { SelectBase selectBase(true, _T("abc")); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getSelectType(), false); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getTypeName(_T("abc")); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getEntityType(), -1); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getDataPos(), -1); } The first test passed correctly, initializing all the variables. The constructor in the second unit test did not correctly set EntityType or DataPosition, but the unit test passed. I was able to get it to fail by placing some variables on the stack in the second test, like so: BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(test_select_base_instantiation_default) { int a, b; SelectBase selectBase(true, _T("abc")); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getSelectType(), false); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getTypeName(_T("abc")); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getEntityType(), -1); BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL( selectBase.getDataPos(), -1); } If there is only one int, only the dataPos CHECK_EQUAL fails, but if there are two, both EntityType and DataPos fail, so it seems pretty clear that this is an issue with the variables being created on the same stack memory or some such. Is there a good way to clear the memory between each unit test, or am I potentially using the library incorrectly or writing bad tests? Any help would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Silverlight Unit Testing Framework running tests in external class library

    - by Jonas Follesø
    I'm currently looking into different options for unit testing Silverlight applications. One of the frameworks available is the Silverlight Unit Test Framework from Microsoft (developed primary by Jeff Wilcox, http://www.jeff.wilcox.name/2010/05/sl3-utf-bits/). One of the scenarios I'm looking into is running the same tests on both Silverlight 3 (PC) and Windows Phone 7. The Silverlight Unit Test Framework (SLUT) runs on both PC and phone. To prevent having to copy or link files I would like to put my tests into a shared test library, that can be loaded by either a WP7 application using the SLUT, or a Silverlight 3 application using SLUT. So my question is: will SLUT load unit tests defined in a referenced class library, or only in the executing assembly?

    Read the article

  • ReSharper Unit Test Runner: Support for Deployment Items

    - by driis
    I like the Unit test runner in ReSharper 4.5, and would like to use it with my MSTest tests, but one thing annoys me: In some of our solutions, we have set up some Deployment Items in the .testrunconfig file. The ReSharper Unit Test runner does not seem to respect this, so I get errors when trying to run the unit tests from ReSharper. Is there any workraound for this ? Update: citizenmatt's answer was correct, the option to use a .testrunconfig with ReSharper exists in the Options dialog of ReSharper. You have to select the unit test provider on the list, then the controls to do that appears. (That was not obvious or discoverable, at least not for me ;-)

    Read the article

  • Is Unit Testing important?

    - by PieterG
    I've recently been catching up on my podcasts and reading and found this article from Joel Spolsky. The Question that I for all of you is the following. Is Unit Testing Important? What do you test? Do you write unit tests on all your projects? I suppose this question is a bit more of a poll on unit test coverage.

    Read the article

  • Prove correctness of unit test

    - by Timo Willemsen
    I'm creating a graph framework for learning purposes. I'm using a TDD approach, so I'm writing a lot of unit tests. However, I'm still figuring out how to prove the correctness of my unit tests For example, I have this class (not including the implementation, and I have simplified it) public class SimpleGraph(){ //Returns true on success public boolean addEdge(Vertex v1, Vertex v2) { ... } //Returns true on sucess public boolean addVertex(Vertex v1) { ... } } I also have created this unit tests @Test public void SimpleGraph_addVertex_noSelfLoopsAllowed(){ SimpleGraph g = new SimpleGraph(); Vertex v1 = new Vertex('Vertex 1'); actual = g.addVertex(v1); boolean expected = false; boolean actual = g.addEdge(v1,v1); Assert.assertEquals(expected,actual); } Okay, awesome it works. There is only one crux here, I have proved that the functions work for this case only. However, in my graph theory courses, all I'm doing is proving theorems mathematically (induction, contradiction etc. etc.). So I was wondering is there a way I can prove my unit tests mathematically for correctness? So is there a good practice for this. So we're testing the unit for correctness, instead of testing it for one certain outcome.

    Read the article

  • Visual Studio Unit Testing of Windows Forms

    - by GWLlosa
    We're working on a project here in Visual Studio 2008. We're using the built-in testing suite provided with it (the Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting namespace). It turns out, that much to our chagrin, a great deal of complexity (and therefore errors) have wound up coded into our UI layer. While our unit tests do a decent job of covering our business layer, our UI layer is a constant source of irritation. We'd ideally like to unit-test that, as well. Does anyone know of a good "Microsoft-compatible" way of doing that in visual studio? Will it introduce some sort of conflict to 'mix' unit testing frameworks like nUnitForms with the Microsoft stuff? Are there any obvious bear traps I should be aware of with unit-testing forms?

    Read the article

  • Migrate Spring JPA DAO unit testing to google app engine

    - by twingocerise
    I'm trying to put together a simple environment where I can get Spring, Maven, JPA, Google App Engine and DAO unit testing working happily all together. The goal is to be able to run a simple DAO unit test creating an entity and then load it again with a simple find to check it's been created properly - all of this from my maven build. My dao is making use of the JPA entity manager (query(), persist(), etc.) I've got it working no problem with hsqldb and a datasource, etc. but I'm struggling to get it working with appengine. My questions are: 1) I'm using an entity manager, injecting my persistence unit as followed. Is it OK? Is there any need for a datasource or something special? I thought not but correct me if I'm wrong. applicationContext.xml <bean id='entityManagerFactory' class='org.springframework.orm.jpa.LocalContainerEntityManagerFactoryBean'> <property name="persistenceUnitName" value="transactions-optional" /> </bean> Persistence.xml <persistence-unit name="transactions-optional"> <provider>org.datanucleus.store.appengine.jpa.DatastorePersistenceProvider</provider> <properties> <property name="datanucleus.NontransactionalRead" value="true"/> <property name="datanucleus.NontransactionalWrite" value="true"/> <property name="datanucleus.ConnectionURL" value="appengine"/> </properties> </persistence-unit> 2) what are the dependencies I need to add to my pom file to be able to run the unit test making use of the entityManager? What about versions ? I found loads of things about appengine-api-labs/stubs/testing but none them got it working i.e. I'm getting jdo dependency missing while I'm using JPA... I also get loads of conflicts when I try to add some jars (datanucleus and stuff). So far I'm trying appengine-api-1.0-sdk v1.7.0 - ASM-all v3.3 - datanucleus core/api-jpa/enhancer v3.1.0 - datanucleus-appengine v2.0.1.1 and all the gae testing jars v1.7.0 3) Is there anything I need to add to my surefire plugin (test runner) to make sure it picks up all the dependencies? I'm getting an exhausting ClassNotFound on DatastorePersistenceProvider while it is in my classpath (I checked the jars and the mvn dependency:tree) I had a look at this but it doesn't seem to be working at all: http://www.vertigrated.com/blog/2011/02/working-maven-3-google-app-engine-plugin-with-gwt-support/ 4) Do I need to use any sot of localhelper to test my DAOs? Ideally I'd want to test my dao layer "as is" with the entity manager... what's your opinion ? Has anyone managed to run a unit test using JPA on google app engine ? 5) Do I need to set up any sort of gae.home somewhere in my pom file? Would anyone make use of it (a plugin or something) ? 6) Is the gwt-maven plugin any helpful if I don't use gwt - I'm writing a simple webservice making use of appengine, not a GWT app... Any help would be much appreciated as I've been struggling for 2 days now... Cheers, V.

    Read the article

  • Unit testing class in a web service in .net

    - by Dan Bailiff
    After some digging here, I took the advice in this thread: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/371961/how-to-unit-test-c-web-service-with-visual-studio-2008 I've created a separate class and my web service class is just a wrapper for that one. The problem is that when I try to create a unit test project in VS2008, it insists on creating a unit test that acts like I'm testing the web service calls instead of the class I specified. I can't get to the class I'm trying to test. I have a web service "subscription_api.asmx". The code behind is "subscription_api.cs" which contains the web method wrapper calls to the real code at "subscription.cs". I would expect to be able to do the following: [TestMethod()] public void GetSystemStatusTest() { subscription sub = new subscription(); XmlNode node = sub.GetSystemStatusTest(); Assert.IsNotNull(node); } But instead I get this mess which is autogenerated from VS'08: /// <summary> ///A test for GetSystemStatus ///</summary> // TODO: Ensure that the UrlToTest attribute specifies a URL to an ASP.NET page (for example, // http://.../Default.aspx). This is necessary for the unit test to be executed on the web server, // whether you are testing a page, web service, or a WCF service. [TestMethod()] [HostType("ASP.NET")] [AspNetDevelopmentServerHost("C:\\CVSROOT\\rnr\\pro\\product\\wms\\ss\\subscription_api", "/subscription_api")] [UrlToTest("http://localhost/subscription_api")] public void GetSystemStatusTest() { subscription_Accessor target = new subscription_Accessor(); // TODO: Initialize to an appropriate value XmlNode expected = null; // TODO: Initialize to an appropriate value XmlNode actual; actual = target.GetSystemStatus(); Assert.AreEqual(expected, actual); Assert.Inconclusive("Verify the correctness of this test method."); } Additionally, there is a "subscription_api.accessor" in the Test References folder. When I try this: [TestMethod()] public void GetSystemStatusTest2() { subscription_Accessor sub = new subscription_Accessor(); XmlNode node = sub.GetSystemStatus(); Assert.IsNotNull(node); } I get an error: Test method subscription_api.Test.subscriptionTest.GetSystemStatusTest2 threw exception: System.TypeInitializationException: The type initializer for 'subscription_Accessor' threw an exception. ---> System.ArgumentNullException: Value cannot be null. I'm really new to unit testing and feel lost. How can I create a unit test just for my subscription class in "subscription.cs" without testing the web service? Am I limited to testing within the same project (I hope not)? Do I have to put the target class in its own project outside of the web service project?

    Read the article

  • Is Unit Testing worth the effort?

    - by The Talking Walnut
    I am working to integrate unit testing into the development process on the team I work on and there are some skeptics. What are some good ways to convince the skeptical developers on the team of the value of Unit Testing? In my specific case we would be adding Unit Tests as we add functionality or fixed bugs. Unfortunately our code base does not lend itself to easy testing.

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing a CSV Parser and Column Mapping Tool

    - by PieterG
    I am really starting to enjoy unit testing and have the following question to the gurus of unit testing. Let's for example say I have the following class public class FileMapper { public Dictionary<string, string> ReadFile(string filename, string delimeter){} } How do you guys generally go about unit testing a Parser or ReadFile method in my case?

    Read the article

  • Multiple arrangements/asserts per unit test?

    - by lance
    A group of us (.NET developers) are talking unit testing. Not any one framework (we've hit on MSpec, NUint, MSTest, RhinoMocks, TypeMock, etc) -- we're just talking generally. We see lots of syntax that forces a distinct unit test per scenario, but we don't see an avenue to re-using one unit test with various inputs or scenarios. Also, we don't see an avenue to multiple asserts in a given test without an early assert's failure threatening the testing of later asserts (in the same test). Is there anything like that happening in .NET unit testing (state- or behavior-based) today?

    Read the article

  • Second Unit Test Not Running

    - by TomJ
    I am having trouble getting my Method B test to run. The logic is fine, but when the unit tests are run, only Method A will run. If Method A and B are switched in terms of spots, only Method B will run. So clearly the code is wrong at some point. Do I need to call method B's test from inside method A in order to get both unit tests to run? I'm pretty new to C#, so forgive my basic question. using redacted; using Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting; using System; namespace UnitTests { [TestClass()] public class ClassTest { public TestContext TestContext{get;set;} [TestMethod()] public void MethodATest() { the unit test } [TestMethod()] public void MethodBTest() { the unit test } } }

    Read the article

  • Getting started with unit testing in VS2010?

    - by Herb Caudill
    I'm new to both unit testing and Visual Studio 2010 (just upgraded from 2008). I'm interested in using VS2010's new built-in unit testing tools, but would like to get the lay of the land first. I haven't been able to find any resources or tutorials on unit testing with VS2010 specifically - has anyone found a good walk-through? I'm also open to persuasion that we should stick with NUnit or the like, if anyone knows a reason to avoid the built-in tools.

    Read the article

  • C# Unit testing resources

    - by Mohit Deshpande
    I migrated from Java to C# and so I am wondering how to unit tests in C#. I remember using JUnit to test my Java applications and importing the package, etc. How can I unit test in C#? What are some good resources for unit testing in C#?

    Read the article

  • How can I change ruby log level in unit tests based on context

    - by Stuart
    I'm new to ruby so forgive me if this is simple or I get some terminology wrong. I've got a bunch of unit tests (actually they're integration tests for another project, but they use ruby test/unit) and they all include from a module that sets up an instance variable for the log object. When I run the individual tests I'd like log.level to be debug, but when I run a suite I'd like log.level to be error. Is it possible to do this with the approach I'm taking, or does the code need to be restructured? Here's a small example of what I have so far. The logging module: #!/usr/bin/env ruby require 'logger' module MyLog def setup @log = Logger.new(STDOUT) @log.level = Logger::DEBUG end end A test: #!/usr/bin/env ruby require 'test/unit' require 'mylog' class Test1 < Test::Unit::TestCase include MyLog def test_something @log.info("About to test something") # Test goes here @log.info("Done testing something") end end A test suite made up of all the tests in its directory: #!/usr/bin/env ruby Dir.foreach(".") do |path| if /it-.*\.rb/.match(File.basename(path)) require path end end

    Read the article

  • A good way to write unit tests

    - by bobobobo
    So, I previously wasn't really in the practice of writing unit tests - now I kind of am and I need to check if I'm on the right track. Say you have a class that deals with math computations. class Vector3 { public: // Yes, public. float x,y,z ; // ... ctors ... } ; Vector3 operator+( const Vector3& a, const Vector3 &b ) { return Vector3( a.x + b.y /* oops!! hence the need for unit testing.. */, a.y + b.y, a.z + b.z ) ; } There are 2 ways I can really think of to do a unit test on a Vector class: 1) Hand-solve some problems, then hard code the numbers into the unit test and pass only if equal to your hand and hard-coded result bool UnitTest_ClassVector3_operatorPlus() { Vector3 a( 2, 3, 4 ) ; Vector3 b( 5, 6, 7 ) ; Vector3 result = a + b ; // "expected" is computed outside of computer, and // hard coded here. For more complicated operations like // arbitrary axis rotation this takes a bit of paperwork, // but only the final result will ever be entered here. Vector3 expected( 7, 9, 11 ) ; if( result.isNear( expected ) ) return PASS ; else return FAIL ; } 2) Rewrite the computation code very carefully inside the unit test. bool UnitTest_ClassVector3_operatorPlus() { Vector3 a( 2, 3, 4 ) ; Vector3 b( 5, 6, 7 ) ; Vector3 result = a + b ; // "expected" is computed HERE. This // means all you've done is coded the // same thing twice, hopefully not having // repeated the same mistake again Vector3 expected( 2 + 5, 6 + 3, 4 + 7 ) ; if( result.isNear( expected ) ) return PASS ; else return FAIL ; } Or is there another way to do something like this?

    Read the article

  • Grails unit testing and bootstrap

    - by tbruyelle
    I wrote an unit test for a controller. I have a Bootstrap file which alter the metaclass of domain classes by adding a method asPublicMap(). I use this method in the controller to return domain classes as json but only some selected public fields. My unit test failed because of MissingMethodException for asPublicMap(). As I understood, bootstrap classes are not loaded for unit tests, only for integration tests. That's why I got this error. My question is : Is there another place to put metaclass manipulation in order to take them into account during unit tests ?

    Read the article

  • Free Online Translation Tool Hosting for Java Open Source Project [closed]

    - by Yan Cheng CHEOK
    I'm looking for a free online translation tool hosting. I wish to leverage help from open source community, to keep the language files for an open source project (Java) up to date. http://jstock.hg.sourceforge.net/hgweb/jstock/jstock/file/7871125356f7/src/org/yccheok/jstock/data Pootle seems good, as it supports Java language properties files as well. However, their official hosting site, is not opened for public registration. I was wondering, is there any free online translation tool hosting for Java open source project (Or similar) ?

    Read the article

  • What kind of code would Kent Beck avoid unit testing?

    - by tieTYT
    I've been watching a few of the Is TDD Dead? talks on youtube, and one of the things that surprised me is Kent Beck seems to acknowledge that there are just some kinds of programs that aren't worth unit testing. For example, right here DHH says that Kent Beck is ... very happy to say "Well, TDD doesn't fit in this case, I'm just going to bail" It's frustrating to me that Kent Beck seems to acknowledge this, but nobody asks him to elaborate on it or give concrete examples. I'd like to know the situations where Kent Beck thinks TDD is a bad fit. Nobody can read his mind or speak for him, but I'm hoping he's been transparent enough through his books/tweets/whatever for someone to be able to answer. I'm not necessarily going to take what he says as gospel, but it would be useful to know that the times I've tried TDD and it just felt impossible/useless are situations that he would have bailed on it himself. Or, if it turned out he would have tested that code it'd suggest to me that I was approaching the process very wrong. I also think it would be enlightening to understand why he would bail on such projects. My opinion on why this is not a duplicate of "When is it appropriate to not unit test?" After skimming those answers I'm not satisfied. For example, look at UncleBob's answer. He doesn't even acknowledge that such a situation exists. I really think there's value in understanding Kent Beck's position, not just a general, "What's your opinion?" type of question. After all, he's the father of TDD.

    Read the article

  • How to unit test models in MVC / MVR app?

    - by BBnyc
    I'm building a node.js web app and am trying to do so for the first time in a test driven fashion. I'm using nodeunit for testing, which I find allows me to write tests quickly and painlessly. In this particular app, the heavy lifting primarily involves translating SQL data into complex Javascript object and serving them to the front-end via json. Likewise, the app also spends a great deal of code validating and translating complex, multidimensional Javascript objects it receives from the front-end into SQL rows. Hence I have used a fat model design for the app -- most of the real code resides in the models, where the data translation happens. What's the best approach to test such models with unit tests? I mean in particular the methods that have create javascript objects from the SQL rows and serve them to the front-end. Right now what I'm doing is making particular requests of my models with the unit tests and checking the returned data for all of the fields that should be there. However I have a suspicion that this is not the most robust kind of testing I could be doing. My current testing design also means I have to package my app code with some dummy data so that my tests can anticipate the kind of data that the app should be returning when tests run.

    Read the article

  • Is wrapping a third party code the only solution to unit test its consumers? [closed]

    - by Songo
    I'm doing unit testing and in one of my classes I need to send a mail from one of the methods, so using constructor injection I inject an instance of Zend_Mail class which is in Zend framework. Now some people argue that if a library is stable enough and won't change often then there is no need to wrap it. So assuming that Zend_Mail is stable and won't change and it fits my needs entirely, then I won't need a wrapper for it. Now take a look at my class Logger that depends on Zend_Mail: class Logger{ private $mailer; function __construct(Zend_Mail $mail){ $this->mail=$mail; } function toBeTestedFunction(){ //Some code $this->mail->setTo('some value'); $this->mail->setSubject('some value'); $this->mail->setBody('some value'); $this->mail->send(); //Some } } However, Unit testing demands that I test one component at a time, so I need to mock the Zend_Mail class. In addition I'm violating the Dependency Inversion principle as my Logger class now depends on concretion not abstraction. Now is wrapping Zend_Mail the only solution or is there a better approach to this problem? The code is in PHP, but answers doesn't have to be. This is more of a design issue than a language specific feature

    Read the article

  • How to populate a private container for unit test?

    - by Sardathrion
    I have a class that defines a private (well, __container to be exact since it is python) container. I am using the information within said container as part of the logic of what the class does and have the ability to add/delete the elements of said container. For unit tests, I need to populate this container with some data. That date depends on the test done and thus putting it all in setUp() would be impractical and bloated -- plus it could add unwanted side effects. Since the data is private, I can only add things via the public interface of the object. This run codes that need not be run during a unit test and in some case is just a copy and paste from another test. Currently, I am mocking the whole container but somehow it does not feel that elegant a solution. Due to Python mocking frame work (mock), this requires the container to be public -- so I can use patch.dict(). I would rather keep that data private. What pattern can one use to still populate the containers without excising the public method so I have data to test with? Is there a way to do this with mock' patch.dict() that I missed?

    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 >