Search Results

Search found 11010 results on 441 pages for 'testing strategies'.

Page 99/441 | < Previous Page | 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106  | Next Page >

  • C# unit test code questions continue

    - by 5YrsLaterDBA
    more questions after questions in here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2714073/c-unit-test-code-questions I found the VS unit test testframe treat private and protected method in the same way but deferent with public method. The following is the generated code for a private method: /// <summary> ///A test for recordLogin ///</summary> [TestMethod()] [DeploymentItem("SystemSoftware.exe")] public void recordLoginTest() { User_Accessor target = new User_Accessor(); // TODO: Initialize to an appropriate value Guid userId = new Guid(); // TODO: Initialize to an appropriate value string action = string.Empty; // TODO: Initialize to an appropriate value Users user = null; // TODO: Initialize to an appropriate value AndeDBEntities db = null; // TODO: Initialize to an appropriate value bool expected = false; // TODO: Initialize to an appropriate value bool actual; actual = target.recordLogin(userId, action, user, db); Assert.AreEqual(expected, actual); Assert.Inconclusive("Verify the correctness of this test method."); } questions: [DeploymentItem("SystemSoftware.exe")] is for private and protected methods, why needs it and what is it for? In my original class/file, if I point to the original method and try to "Find All References". The reference in the unit test class/file will not show up for private and protected methods but it will show up for all public methods. Why is that? Is it right? 3.

    Read the article

  • Open source license for test code

    - by Gary
    I'm creating a project to house an iPhone library for common code for the iPhone... essentially it's a library that'll save people from finding solutions to common problems that amount to copying and pasting snippets of code. The site is located here: http://code.google.com/p/devkit-bb/ I licensed it under Eclipse, because fosters the extension of the library without requiring constraints like LGPL on object files being provided/made available, which would be the case since everything is statically linked. What I'm wondering is how/what license to apply to the unit tests? Since they essentially demonstrate how to use various interfaces and components. Thus they're designed for potential copy and paste situations, and I don't want people who might end up using this as part of the building blocks of their environment to feel like the license would prohibit that "derivative work", ie. their application or game.

    Read the article

  • How to test COM object integrity automatically?

    - by sharptooth
    Every COM object must have integrity. In simplified terms this means that if an object implements 3 interfaces - A, B and C and I have A* pointer to the object I must be able to successfully QueryInterface() both B and C and having B I must be able to retrieve A and C and having C I must be able to retrieve A and B. Now my object implements 5 interfaces and I want to test its integrity. Writing checks for all of the above myself will require a substantial effort. Is there a tool or some easily tweakable code or a code pattern that would do it?

    Read the article

  • How to create list of installed packages for remove after testing?

    - by Wolf F.
    I like to test kmymoney. When trying to install there are a lot of kde packages that are needed by this program. That's ok, I'm using Unity and there are no kde packages installed at this moment. So, when I like to remove all this packages after testing kmymoney, how can I do that? sudo apt-get install kmymoney >> /some/folder/kmymoney.txt gives me the output of apt-get, but that's not what I'm looking for. Is there a way to remove this packages properly? Thanx in advance W.

    Read the article

  • Automatically generate table of function pointers in C.

    - by jeremytrimble
    I'm looking for a way to automatically (as part of the compilation/build process) generate a "table" of function pointers in C. Specifically, I want to generate an array of structures something like: typedef struct { void (*p_func)(void); char * funcName; } funcRecord; /* Automatically generate the lines below: */ extern void func1(void); extern void func2(void); /* ... */ funcRecord funcTable[] = { { .p_func = &func1, .funcName = "func1" }, { .p_func = &func2, .funcName = "func2" } /* ... */ }; /* End automatically-generated code. */ ...where func1 and func2 are defined in other source files. So, given a set of source files, each of which which contain a single function that takes no arguments and returns void, how would one automatically (as part of the build process) generate an array like the one above that contains each of the functions from the files? I'd like to be able to add new files and have them automatically inserted into the table when I re-compile. I realize that this probably isn't achievable using the C language or preprocessor alone, so consider any common *nix-style tools fair game (e.g. make, perl, shell scripts (if you have to)). But Why? You're probably wondering why anyone would want to do this. I'm creating a small test framework for a library of common mathematical routines. Under this framework, there will be many small "test cases," each of which has only a few lines of code that will exercise each math function. I'd like each test case to live in its own source file as a short function. All of the test cases will get built into a single executable, and the test case(s) to be run can be specified on the command line when invoking the executable. The main() function will search through the table and, if it finds a match, jump to the test case function. Automating the process of building up the "catalog" of test cases ensures that test cases don't get left out (for instance, because someone forgets to add it to the table) and makes it very simple for maintainers to add new test cases in the future (just create a new source file in the correct directory, for instance). Hopefully someone out there has done something like this before. Thanks, StackOverflow community!

    Read the article

  • c# Unit Test: Writing to Settings in unit test does not save values in user.config

    - by HorstWalter
    I am running a c# unit test (VS 2008). Within the test I do write to the settings, which should result in saving the data to the user.config. Settings.Default.X = "History"; // X is string Settings.Default.Save(); But this simply does not create the file (I have crosschecked under "C:\Documents and Settings\HW\Local Settings\Application Data"). If I create the same stuff as a Console application, there is no problem persisting the data (same code). Is there something special I need to consider doing this in a UnitTest?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC unit test controller with HttpContext

    - by user299592
    I am trying to write a unit test for my one controller to verify if a view was returned properly, but this controller has a basecontroller that accesses the HttpContext.Current.Session. Everytime I create a new instance of my controller is calls the basecontroller constructor and the test fails with a null pointer exception on the HttpContext.Current.Session. Here is the code: public class BaseController : Controller { protected BaseController() { ViewData["UserID"] = HttpContext.Current.Session["UserID"]; } } public class IndexController : BaseController { public ActionResult Index() { return View("Index.aspx"); } } [TestMethod] public void Retrieve_IndexTest() { // Arrange const string expectedViewName = "Index"; IndexController controller = new IndexController(); // Act var result = controller.Index() as ViewResult; // Assert Assert.IsNotNull(result, "Should have returned a ViewResult"); Assert.AreEqual(expectedViewName, result.ViewName, "View name should have been {0}", expectedViewName); } Any ideas on how to mock the Session that is accessed in the base controller so the test in the descendant controller will run?

    Read the article

  • Bash scripting know the result of a command.

    - by Fork
    Hi, I am writing a bash script to run an integration test of a tool I am writing. Basically I run the application with a set of inputs and compare the results with expected values using the diff command line tool. It's working, but I would like to enhance it by knowing the result of the diff command and print "SUCCESS" or "FAIL" depending on the result of the diff. How can I do it?

    Read the article

  • jquery - loading inline javascript via AJAX

    - by yaya3
    I have thrown together a quick prototype to try and establish a few very basic truths regarding what inline JavaScript can do when it is loaded with AJAX: index.html <html> <head> <script src="http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1/jquery.min.js"></script> </head> <body> <script type="text/javascript"> $('p').css('color','white'); alert($('p').css('color')); // DISPLAYS FIRST but is "undefined" $(document).ready(function(){ $('#ajax-loaded-content-wrapper').load('loaded-by-ajax.html', function(){ $('p').css('color','grey'); alert($('p').css('color')); // DISPLAYS LAST (as expected) }); $('p').css('color','purple'); alert($('p').css('color')); // DISPLAYS SECOND }); </script> <p>Content not loaded by ajax</p> <div id="ajax-loaded-content-wrapper"> </div> </body> </html> loaded-by-ajax.html <p>Some content loaded by ajax</p> <script type="text/javascript"> $('p').css('color','yellow'); alert($('p').css('color')); // DISPLAYS THIRD $(document).ready(function(){ $('p').css('color','pink'); alert($('p').css('color')); // DISPLAYS FOURTH }); </script> <p>Some content loaded by ajax</p> <script type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function(){ $('p').css('color','blue'); alert($('p').css('color')); // DISPLAYS FIFTH }); $('p').css('color','green'); alert($('p').css('color')); // DISPLAYS SIX </script> <p>Some content loaded by ajax</p> Notes: a) All of the above (except the first) successfully change the colour of all the paragraphs (in firefox 3.6.3). b) I've used alert instead of console.log as console is undefined when called in the 'loaded' HTML. Truths(?): $(document).ready() does not treat the 'loaded' HTML as a new document, or reread the entire DOM tree including the loaded HTML, it is pointless inside AJAX loaded content JavaScript that is contained inside 'loaded' HTML can effect the style of existing DOM nodes One can successfully use the jQuery library inside 'loaded' HTML to effect the style of existing DOM nodes One can not use the firebug inside 'loaded' HTML can effect the existing DOM (proven by Note a) Am I correct in deriving these 'truths' from my tests (test validity)? If not, how would you test for these?

    Read the article

  • ruby Test::Unit Command line options?

    - by Joe Soul-bringer
    Hi all, When running tests in Ruby's unit::test framework, is there a really easy way to specify, from the command-line, that only one test should be run (that is, specify the test class and test member variable)? If not, is there another framework that has this feature?

    Read the article

  • Bad linking in Qt unit test -- missing the link to the moc file?

    - by dwj
    I'm trying to unit test a class that inherits QObject; the class itself is located up one level in my directory structure. When I build the unit test I get the standard unresolved errors if a class' MOC file cannot be found: test.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "public: virtual void * __thiscall UnitToTest::qt_metacast(char const *)" (?qt_metacast@UnitToTest@@UAEPAXPBD@Z) + 2 missing functions The MOC file is created but appears to not be linking. I've been poking around SO, the web, and Qt's docs for quite a while and have hit a wall. How do I get the unit test to include the MOC file in the link? ==== My project file is dead simple: TEMPLATE = app TARGET = test DESTDIR = . CONFIG += qtestlib INCLUDEPATH += . .. DEPENDPATH += . HEADERS += test.h SOURCES += test.cpp ../UnitToTest.cpp stubs.cpp DEFINES += UNIT_TEST My directory structure and files: C:. | UnitToTest.cpp | UnitToTest.h | \---test | test.cpp (Makefiles removed for clarity) | test.h | test.pro | stubs.cpp | +---debug | UnitToTest.obj | test.obj | test.pdb | moc_test.cpp | moc_test.obj | stubs.obj Edit: Additional information The generated Makefile.Debug shows the moc file missing: SOURCES = test.cpp \ ..\test.cpp \ stubs.cpp debug\moc_test.cpp OBJECTS = debug\test.obj \ debug\UnitToTest.obj \ debug\stubs.obj \ debug\moc_test.obj

    Read the article

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

    - by DVK
    If my Perl code has a production code location and "beta" code location (e.g. production Perl code us in /usr/code/scripts, BETA Perl code is in /usr/code/beta/scripts; production Perl libraries are in /usr/code/lib/perl and BETA versions of those libraries are in /usr/code/beta/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 BETA location. To clarify, to promote any code (library or script) from BETA to production, the ONLY thing which needs to happen is literally issuing cp command from BETA to prod location - both the file name AND file contents must remain identical. BETA versions of scripts must call other BETA scripts and BETA libraries (if exist) or production libraries (if BETA libraries do not exist) The code paths must be the same between BETA and production with the exception of base directory (/usr/code/ vs /usr/code/beta/) 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

  • How do I run all my PHPUnit tests?

    - by JJ
    I have script called Script.php and tests for it in Tests/Script.php, but when I run phpunit Tests it does not execute any tests in my test file. How do I run all my tests with phpunit? PHPUnit 3.3.17, PHP 5.2.6-3ubuntu4.2, latest Ubuntu Output: $ phpunit Tests PHPUnit 3.3.17 by Sebastian Bergmann. Time: 0 seconds OK (0 tests, 0 assertions) And here are my script and test files: Script.php <?php function returnsTrue() { return TRUE; } ?> Tests/Script.php <?php require_once 'PHPUnit/Framework.php'; require_once 'Script.php' class TestingOne extends PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase { public function testTrue() { $this->assertEquals(TRUE, returnsTrue()); } public function testFalse() { $this->assertEquals(FALSE, returnsTrue()); } } class TestingTwo extends PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase { public function testTrue() { $this->assertEquals(TRUE, returnsTrue()); } public function testFalse() { $this->assertEquals(FALSE, returnsTrue()); } } ?>

    Read the article

  • Test if a number is fibonacci

    - by VaioIsBorn
    I know how to make the list of the Fibonacci numbers, but i don't know how can i test if a given number belongs to the fibonacci list - one way that comes in mind is generate the list of fib. numbers up to that number and see if it belongs to the array, but there's got to be another, simpler and faster method. Any ideas ?

    Read the article

  • DRY for JMeter tests

    - by jens
    Is there a way to modularize JMeter tests. I have recorded several use cases for our application. Each of them is in a separate thread group in the same test plan. To control the workflow I wrote some primitives (e.g. postprocessor elements) that are used in many of these thread groups. Is there a way not to copy these elements into each thread group but to use some kind of referencing within the same test plan? What would also be helpful is a way to reference elements from a different file. Does anybody have any solutions or workarounds. I guess I am not the only one trying to follow the DRY principle...

    Read the article

  • How to parametrize a test using cppunit

    - by Harald Scheirich
    We are using cppunit, i am trying to run the same test using different parameters, running a loop inside the test is not a good option as any failure will abort the test. I have looked at TestDecorator and TestCaller but neither seem to really fit. Code samples would be helpful. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How do you mock a Sealed class?

    - by Brett Veenstra
    Mocking sealed classes can be quite a pain. I currently favor an Adapter pattern to handle this, but something about just keeps feels weird. So, What is the best way you mock sealed classes? Java answers are more than welcome. In fact, I would anticipate that the Java community has been dealing with this longer and has a great deal to offer. But here are some of the .NET opinions: Why Duck Typing Matters for C# Develoepers Creating wrappers for sealed and other types for mocking Unit tests for WCF (and Moq)

    Read the article

  • Using Selenium, how can I test a web UI that returns XML instead of HTML?

    - by Kurt W. Leucht
    I'm using Selenium to unit test my Perl cgi script and all works fine except in one case where my cgi script returns XML content to the web browser instead of returning HTML content. I'm new to Selenium and only pasted in their sample script to get started, but I can't seem to find a Selenium command in any of the documentation that will recognize that my XML response has been returned. The Selenium commands seem to assume that an HTML page is always being returned.

    Read the article

  • How do you unit test JEE code?

    - by marabol
    I want to ask for your prefered way to test JEE code? I found only three project, that are trying to help to code unit tests in JEE environment: http://jakarta.apache.org/cactus/ : Last Published: 2009-01-18 http://www.junitee.org/ : Last Release: 2004-12-11 http://ejb3unit.sourceforge.net/ : Last Release: 2008-05-17 So I wonder, is there any framework helping to write (j) unit test for JEE code? do you use embedded JEE servers like jboss or glassfish v3? do you mockup and inject by yourself? Thanks a lot...

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106  | Next Page >