Search Results

Search found 10178 results on 408 pages for 'testing metaprogramming'.

Page 94/408 | < Previous Page | 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101  | Next Page >

• Establish context with Watin

  - by Ian Quigley

  Feel free to tell me I'm doing this wrong but... I have the Watin attribute [Browser("IE")] and want to extend this attribute so that it will perform an action (login) to establish the context for the test (setup). I've created public class LoggedInBrowserAttribute : BrowserAttribute which takes URL, username, password and performs the login steps. However, if for some reason the username/password won't login to the system I don't want to perform the test. In the GetBrowser method I'm doing an Assert (is logged in) which seems wrong. What is the correct way to establish this context / abort the test? I don't want to return null from GetBrowser and then have if (browser == null) at the top of my test.

  Read the article

• MSTEST CollectionAssert use with generics?

  - by Rosarch

  It appears that CollectionAssert cannot be used with generics. This is super frustrating; the code I want to test does use generics. What am I to do? Write boilerplate to convert between the two? Manually check collection equivalence?

  Read the article

• wxWidgets: How to initialize wxApp without using macros and without entering the main application l

  - by m_pGladiator

  We need to write unit tests for a wxWidgets application using Google Test Framework. The problem is that wxWidgets uses the macro IMPLEMENT_APP(MyApp) to initialize and enter the application main loop. This macro creates several functions including int main(). The google test framework also uses macro definitions for each test. One of the problems is that it is not possible to call the wxWidgets macro from within the test macro, because the first one creates functions.. So, we found that we could replace the macro with the following code: wxApp* pApp = new MyApp(); wxApp::SetInstance(pApp); wxEntry(argc, argv); That's a good replacement, but wxEntry() call enters the original application loop. If we don't call wxEntry() there are still some parts of the application not initialized. The question is how to initialize everything required for a wxApp to run, without actually running it, so we are able to unit test portions of it?

  Read the article

• junit4 functions

  - by lamisse

  how to create generic functions that could be called from each java test? In my function startappli I have : public class startappli{ public void testMain (String[] args) { String[] logInfos = new String[3]; logInfos[0] = (String) args[0]; logInfos[1] = (String) args[1]; } @BeforeClass public static void setupOnce() { final Thread thread = new Thread() { public void run() { entrypointtoGUI.main(new String[]{"arg0 ", "arg1"}); } }; try { thread.start(); } catch (Exception ex) { } } } in the toto.java , I call the function as follow : startappli.testmain(loginfo) it doesn't work help ?

  Read the article

• test questiontest question test question test question? [closed]

  - by user365217

  TestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestionTestQuestion

  Read the article

• Java JUnit: The method X is ambiguous for type Y

  - by Rosarch

  I had some tests working fine. Then, I moved it to a different package, and am now getting errors. Here is the code: import static org.junit.Assert.*; import java.util.HashSet; import java.util.Map; import java.util.Set; import org.jgrapht.Graphs; import org.jgrapht.WeightedGraph; import org.jgrapht.graph.DefaultWeightedEdge; import org.jgrapht.graph.SimpleWeightedGraph; import org.junit.*; @Test public void testEccentricity() { WeightedGraph<String, DefaultWeightedEdge> g = generateSimpleCaseGraph(); Map<String, Double> eccen = JGraphtUtilities.eccentricities(g); assertEquals(70, eccen.get("alpha")); assertEquals(80, eccen.get("l")); assertEquals(130, eccen.get("l-0")); assertEquals(100, eccen.get("l-1")); assertEquals(90, eccen.get("r")); assertEquals(120, eccen.get("r-0")); assertEquals(130, eccen.get("r-1")); } The error message is this: The method assertEquals(Object, Object) is ambiguous for the type JGraphtUtilitiesTest How can I fix this? Why did this problem occur as I moved the class to a different package?

  Read the article

• How test guice injections?

  - by yeraycaballero

  I gave to Google Guice the responsability of wiring my objects. But, How can I test if the bindings are working well. For example, suppose we have a class A which has a dependence B. How can I test than B is injected correctly. class A { private B b; public A() {} @Inject public void setB(B b) { this.b = b } } Notice A hasn't got a getB() method and I want to assert that A.b isn't null.

  Read the article

• How rspec works with rails3 for integration-tests?

  - by makevoid

  What I'm trying to ahieve is to do integration tests with webrat in rails3 like Yehuda does with test-unit in http://pivotallabs.com/talks/76-extending-rails-3 minute 34. an example: describe SomeApp it "should show the index page" visit "/" body.should =~ /hello world/ end end Does someone knows a way to do it?

  Read the article

• C# unit test code questions

  - by 5YrsLaterDBA

  We start use C# build-in unit test functionality. I have VisualStudio 2008 created unit test code for me. I have few question above the generated code. Following are code I copied from the generated file: #region Additional test attributes // //You can use the following additional attributes as you write your tests: // //Use ClassInitialize to run code before running the first test in the class //[ClassInitialize()] //public static void MyClassInitialize(TestContext testContext) //{ //} // //Use ClassCleanup to run code after all tests in a class have run //[ClassCleanup()] //public static void MyClassCleanup() //{ //} // //Use TestInitialize to run code before running each test //[TestInitialize()] //public void MyTestInitialize() //{ //} // //Use TestCleanup to run code after each test has run //[TestCleanup()] //public void MyTestCleanup() //{ //} // #endregion If I need the initialize and cleanup methods, do I need to remove those "My" from the method name when I enable them? //Use ClassInitialize to run code before running the first test in the class //[ClassInitialize()] //public static void MyClassInitialize(TestContext testContext) //{ //} Do I need to call the "MyClassInitialize" method somewhere before running the first test or it will be called automatically before other methods are called. Similar questions for other three methods, are they called automatically at right time frame?

  Read the article

• What is the difference between AutomationID and AutomationProperties.Name?

  - by Lernkurve

  What is the difference between the two properties? In what context is which property used? Can you also provide a code example for each?

  Read the article

• Moq and accessing called parameters

  - by lozzar

  I've just started to implement unit tests (using xUnit and Moq) on an already established project of mine. The project extensively uses dependency injection via the unity container. I have two services A and B. Service A is the one being tested in this case. Service A calls B and gives it a delegate to an internal function. This 'callback' is used to notify A when a message has been received that it must handle. Hence A calls (where b is an instance of service B): b.RegisterHandler(Guid id, Action<byte[]> messageHandler); In order to test service A, I need to be able to call messageHandler, as this is the only way it currently accepts messages. Can this be done using Moq? ie. Can I mock service B, such that when RegisterHandler is called, the value of messageHandler is passed out to my test? Or do I need to redesign this? Are there any design patterns I should be using in this case? Does anyone know of any good resources on this kind of design?

  Read the article

• Asp.Net MVC Tutorial Unit Tests

  - by Nicholas

  I am working through Steve Sanderson's book Pro ASP.NET MVC Framework and I having some issues with two unit tests which produce errors. In the example below it tests the CheckOut ViewResult: [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ViewResult CheckOut(Cart cart, FormCollection form) { // Empty carts can't be checked out if (cart.Lines.Count == 0) { ModelState.AddModelError("Cart", "Sorry, your cart is empty!"); return View(); } // Invoke model binding manually if (TryUpdateModel(cart.ShippingDetails, form.ToValueProvider())) { orderSubmitter.SubmitOrder(cart); cart.Clear(); return View("Completed"); } else // Something was invalid return View(); } with the following unit test [Test] public void Submitting_Empty_Shipping_Details_Displays_Default_View_With_Error() { // Arrange CartController controller = new CartController(null, null); Cart cart = new Cart(); cart.AddItem(new Product(), 1); // Act var result = controller.CheckOut(cart, new FormCollection { { "Name", "" } }); // Assert Assert.IsEmpty(result.ViewName); Assert.IsFalse(result.ViewData.ModelState.IsValid); } I have resolved any issues surrounding 'TryUpdateModel' by upgrading to ASP.NET MVC 2 (Release Candidate 2) and the website runs as expected. The associated error messages are: *Tests.CartControllerTests.Submitting_Empty_Shipping_Details_Displays_Default_View_With_Error: System.ArgumentNullException : Value cannot be null. Parameter name: controllerContext* and the more detailed at System.Web.Mvc.ModelValidator..ctor(ModelMetadata metadata, ControllerContext controllerContext) at System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.OnModelUpdated(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) at System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindComplexModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) at System.Web.Mvc.Controller.TryUpdateModel[TModel](TModel model, String prefix, String[] includeProperties, String[] excludeProperties, IValueProvider valueProvider) at System.Web.Mvc.Controller.TryUpdateModel[TModel](TModel model, IValueProvider valueProvider) at WebUI.Controllers.CartController.CheckOut(Cart cart, FormCollection form) Has anyone run into a similar issue or indeed got the test to pass?

  Read the article

• TestNG's groups

  - by the qwerty

  If we have <include name="web" > and <include name="weekend" >, TestNG runs all the methods that belong to either web or weekend. Is it possible to change this behaviour so TestNG would run all the methods that belong to web and weekend? Does anyone knows a way to accomplish this?

  Read the article

• How to run concurrency unit test?

  - by janetsmith

  Hi, How to use junit to run concurrency test? Let's say I have a class public class MessageBoard { public synchronized void postMessage(String message) { .... } public void updateMessage(Long id, String message) { .... } } I wan to test multiple access to this postMessage concurrently. Any advice on this? I wish to run this kind of concurrency test against all my setter functions (or any methodn that involves create/update/delete operation). Thanks

  Read the article

• How to turn off Turbo Boost temporarily?

  - by actual

  In our application we have many versions of the same routine optimized for different kind of processor architectures. During install we run performance tests and select the best version of routine. Latest processors can boost their frequencies if few cores are in use, so sometimes our tests peeking wrong version of routine. Is there some way to temporarily turn off Turbo Boost?

  Read the article

• How to mock Request.Files[] in MVC unit test class?

  - by kapil

  I want to test a controller method in MVC unit test. For my controller method to test, I require a Request.Files[] collection with length one. I want to mock Request.Files[] as I have used a file upload control on my view rendered by controller method. Can anyone please suggest how can I mock request.file collection in my unit test. thanks, kapil

  Read the article

• How do I use test Perl modules from test Perl scripts?

  - by DVK

  If my Perl code has a production code location and "test" code location (e.g. production Perl code us in /usr/code/scripts, test Perl code is in /usr/code/test/scripts; production Perl libraries are in /usr/code/lib/perl and test versions of those libraries are in /usr/code/test/lib/perl, is there an easy way for me to achieve such a setup? The exact requirements are: The code must be THE SAME in production and test location. To clarify, to promote any code (library or script) from test to production, the ONLY thing which needs to happen is literally issuing cp command from test to prod location - both the file name AND file contents must remain identical. Test versions of scripts must call other test scripts and test libraries (if exist) or production libraries (if test libraries do not exist) The code paths must be the same between test and production with the exception of base directory (/usr/code/ vs /usr/code/test/) I will present how we solved the problem as an answer to this question, but I'd like to know if there's a better way.

  Read the article

• Mocking ImportError in Python

  - by Attila Oláh

  I'm trying this for almost two hours now, without any luck. I have a module that looks like this: try: from zope.cpomonent import queryUtility # and things like this except ImportError: # do some fallback operations <-- how to test this? Later in the code: try: queryUtility(foo) except NameError: # do some fallback actions <-- this one is easy with mocking # zope.component.queryUtility to raise a NameError Any ideas?

  Read the article

• How to see the code generated by the compiler

  - by atch

  Guys in one of excersises (ch.5,e.8) from TC++PL Bjarne asks to do following: '"Run some tests to see if your compiler really generates equivalent code for iteration using pointers and iteration using indexing. If different degrees of optimization can be requested, see if and how that affects the quality of the generated code"' Any idea how to eat it and with what? Thanks in advice.

  Read the article

• What makes static initialization functions good, bad, or otherwise?

  - by Richard Levasseur

  Suppose you had code like this: _READERS = None _WRITERS = None def Init(num_readers, reader_params, num_writers, writer_params, ...args...): ...logic... _READERS = new ReaderPool(num_readers, reader_params) _WRITERS = new WriterPool(num_writers, writer_params) ...more logic... class Doer: def __init__(...args...): ... def Read(self, ...args...): c = _READERS.get() try: ...work with conn finally: _READERS.put(c) def Writer(...): ...similar to Read()... To me, this is a bad pattern to follow, some cons: Doers can be created without its preconditions being satisfied The code isn't easily testable because ConnPool can't be directly mocked out. Init has to be called right the first time. If its changed so it can be called multiple times, extra logic has to be added to check if variables are already defined, and lots of NULL values have to be passed around to skip re-initializing. In the event of threads, the above becomes more complicated by adding locking Globals aren't being used to communicate state (which isn't strictly bad, but a code smell) On the other hand, some pros: its very convenient to call Init(5, "user/pass", 2, "user/pass") It simple and "clean" Personally, I think the cons outweigh the pros, that is, testability and assured preconditions outweigh simplicity and convenience.

  Read the article

• UnitTest++ constructing fixtures multiple times?

  - by Peter

  I'm writing some unit tests in UnitTest++ and want to write a bunch of tests which share some common resources. I thought that this should work via their TEST_FIXTURE setup, but it seems to be constructing a new fixture for every test. Sample code: #include <UnitTest++.h> struct SomeFixture { SomeFixture() { // this line is hit twice } }; TEST_FIXTURE(SomeFixture, FirstTest) { } TEST_FIXTURE(SomeFixture, SecondTest) { } I feel like I must be doing something wrong; I had thought that the whole point of having the fixture was so that the setup/teardown code only happens once. Am I wrong on this? Is there something else I have to do to make it work that way?

  Read the article

• 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

• Using SimpleModal with jstestdriver?

  - by leeand00

  Hello, I'm using simpleModal to display a dialog, and I want to be able to tell if it has been displayed or not using jstestdriver. In my browser when I display the dialog it sets the className to "simplemodal-data" on the id of the content I'm displaying, but when I do the same thing in jstestdriver it's like the .modal() function doesn't even do anything. Is there something I'm missing here? Also see this related thread.

  Read the article

• MbUnit (gallio) and Visual Studio.Net Tests Not Completing or Debugging

  - by Davy

  Hi I'm using Gallio\MbUnit 3.1 with ReSharper and Visual Studio 2008. Everything is working well except this type of test: [Test] [Row("test@badEmail@_test.com")] [Row("test@badEmail@_test.")] public void IsValidEmail_Invalid_Emails_Should_Return_False(string invalidEmail) { Assert.IsFalse(AppHelper.IsValidEmail(invalidEmail), "Email validation failed for " + invalidEmail); } The test doesn't complete or go in to debug mode only when I pass in a parameter E.g. 'string invalidEmail'. If I remove that prameter it seems to work normally. It will run the test if I have: [Test] public void IsValidEmail_Invalid_Emails_Should_Return_False() { var invalidName = test@badEmail@_test.com"; Assert.IsFalse(AppHelper.IsValidEmail(invalidEmail), "Email validation failed for " + invalidEmail); } I appreciate that there may be better ways to achieve this test but I'm trying to work my way through a book and this is how it's explaining things. Any help is appreciated. Davy

  Read the article

• DUnit: How to run tests?

  - by Ian Boyd

  How do i run TestCase's from the IDE? i created a new project, with a single, simple, form: unit Unit1; interface uses Windows, Messages, SysUtils, Classes, Graphics, Controls, Forms, Dialogs, StdCtrls; type TForm1 = class(TForm) private public end; var Form1: TForm1; implementation {$R *.DFM} end. Now i'll add a test case to check that pushing Button1 does what it should: unit Unit1; interface uses Windows, Messages, SysUtils, Classes, Graphics, Controls, Forms, Dialogs, StdCtrls; type TForm1 = class(TForm) Button1: TButton; procedure Button1Click(Sender: TObject); private public end; var Form1: TForm1; implementation {$R *.DFM} uses TestFramework; type TForm1Tests = class(TTestCase) private f: TForm1; protected procedure SetUp; override; procedure TearDown; override; published procedure TestButton1Click; end; procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject); begin //todo end; { TForm1Tests } procedure TForm1Tests.SetUp; begin inherited; f := TForm1.Create(nil); end; procedure TForm1Tests.TearDown; begin f.Free; inherited; end; procedure TForm1Tests.TestButton1Click; begin f.Button1Click(nil); Self.CheckEqualsString('Hello, world!', f.Caption); end; end. Given what i've done (test code in the GUI project), how do i now trigger a run of the tests? If i push F9 then the form simply appears: Ideally there would be a button, or menu option, in the IDE saying Run DUnit Tests: Am i living in a dream-world? A fantasy land, living in a gumdrop house on lollipop lane?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101  | Next Page >