Search Results

Search found 25149 results on 1006 pages for 'test automation'.

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 10/1006 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

  • Unit test distributed software

    - by user262646
    Is there any tool or framework able to make it easier to "unit test" distributed software written in Java? My system under test is a peer-to-peer software, and I'd like to perform testing using something like PNUnit, but with Java instead of .Net.

    Read the article

  • Using Django.test.client to check template vars

    - by scott
    I've got a view that I'm trying to test with the Client object. Can I get to the variables I injected into the render_to_response of my view? Example View: def myView(request): if request.method == "POST": # do the search return render_to_response('search.html',{'results':results},context_instance=RequestContext(request)) else: return render_to_response('search.html',context_instance=RequestContext(request) Test: c = Client() response = c.post('/school/search/', {'keyword':'beagles'}) # how do I get to the 'results' variable??

    Read the article

  • Oracle: Addressing Information Overload in Factory Automation

    - by [email protected]
     ORACLE's Stephen Slade has written about addressing information overload on the factory floor.  According to Slade, today's automated processes create large amounts of valuable data, but only a small percentage remains actionable.Oracle claims information overload can cost financially, as companies struggle to store and collect reams of data needed to identify embedded trends, while producing manual reports to meet quality standards, regulatory requirements and general reporting goals.Increasing scrutiny of new requirements and standards add to the need to find new ways to process data. Many companies are now using analytical engines to contextualise data into 'actionable information'. Oracle claims factories need to seriously address their data collection, audit trail and records retention processes. By organising their data, factories can maximise outcomes from excellence and contuinuous improvement programs, and gain visibility into costs int the supply chain.Analytics tools and technologies such as Business Intelligence (BI), Enterprise Manufacturing Intelligence (EMI) and Manufacturing Operations Centers (MOC) can help consolidate, contextual and distribute information.   FULL ARICLE:  http://www.myfen.com.au/news/oracle--addressing-information-overload-in-factory

    Read the article

  • New Recommended Bundle Patch (APR 2010) - 9405592 for Patch Automation on EM 10.2.0.5

    - by Hari Prasanna Srinivasan
    New Recommended Bundle Patch 9405592 is available for download from My Oracle Support now. This patch primarily enhances the Patching functionality offered by Oracle Enterprise Manager Grid Control. This patch is cumulative and is a superset of the previously released bundles # 9132461, #8992470, and #8653501, and therefore, includes all the features that were introduced as part of those Recommended Bundle Patches. For more information, refer to Comprehensive Overview of Recommended Bundle Patch 9405592 under support note - OMS and Agent Patches required for setting up Provisioning, Patching and Cloning in 10.2.0.3 to 10.2.0.5 GC [ID 427577.1] FAQ: #1 If I had applied the previous recommended patches, do I need to rollback before applying this? Yes, if you had applied any of the patches (# 9132461, #8992470 and #8653501) you would need to rollback the patch and apply this. For rollback instructions, refer to the patch README from the support note 427577.1 #2 I recently applied the patch 9132461, do I still need the new patch? The new patch contains additional bug fixes. (For more info see,Comprehensive Overview of Recommended Bundle Patch 9405592) - Augmented Verification and Support for Oracle Database 9i Release 2 (9.2.0.8) and Oracle Databases on Microsoft Windows Platform - Bug fixes resolving issues with patching CPUs on Databases running on Windows platforms - Key bug fixes identified at various customers. Oracle strongly recommends you to apply the latest patch to make sure you do no encounter these issues and you are at the latest patch level for faster issue resolution through support. #3 Can I apply this patch on top of PSU3 (9282397) for Enterprise Manager ? Yes, this patch does NOT conflict with PSU3 and can be applied over it. #4 Is there any known conflicts? If you had applied the patch 8573971, it would conflict with this patch(9405592). You would need to rollback the patch 8573971 and apply this Bundle. Apply the overlay patch - 9583322 to get the fixes of the rolled back patch 8573971. Note: The overlay patch is currently unavailable, it will be made available in few days.

    Read the article

  • White box testing with Google Test

    - by Daemin
    I've been trying out using GoogleTest for my C++ hobby project, and I need to test the internals of a component (hence white box testing). At my previous work we just made the test classes friends of the class being tested. But with Google Test that doesn't work as each test is given its own unique class, derived from the fixture class if specified, and friend-ness doesn't transfer to derived classes. Initially I created a test proxy class that is friends with the tested class. It contains a pointer to an instance of the tested class and provides methods for the required, but hidden, members. This worked for a simple class, but now I'm up to testing a tree class with an internal private node class, of which I need to access and mess with. I'm just wondering if anyone using the GoogleTest library has done any white box testing and if they have any hints or helpful constructs that would make this easier. Ok, I've found the FRIEND_TEST macro defined in the documentation, as well as some hints on how to test private code in the advanced guide. But apart from having a huge amount of friend declerations (i.e. one FRIEND_TEST for each test), is there an easier idion to use, or should I abandon using GoogleTest and move to a different test framework?

    Read the article

  • White box testing with Google Test

    - by Daemin
    I've been trying out using GoogleTest for my C++ hobby project, and I need to test the internals of a component (hence white box testing). At my previous work we just made the test classes friends of the class being tested. But with Google Test that doesn't work as each test is given its own unique class, derived from the fixture class if specified, and friend-ness doesn't transfer to derived classes. Initially I created a test proxy class that is friends with the tested class. It contains a pointer to an instance of the tested class and provides methods for the required, but hidden, members. This worked for a simple class, but now I'm up to testing a tree class with an internal private node class, of which I need to access and mess with. I'm just wondering if anyone using the GoogleTest library has done any white box testing and if they have any hints or helpful constructs that would make this easier. Ok, I've found the FRIEND_TEST macro defined in the documentation, as well as some hints on how to test private code in the advanced guide. But apart from having a huge amount of friend declerations (i.e. one FRIEND_TEST for each test), is there an easier idion to use, or should I abandon using GoogleTest and move to a different test framework?

    Read the article

  • Star Trek inspired home automation visualisation

    - by Zak McKracken
    I’ve always been a more or less active fan of Star Trek. During the construction phase of my house I started coding a GUI for controlling the house which has an EIB. Just for fun I designed a version inspired by the LCARS design used in Star Trek TNG and showed this to my wife. I showed her several designs before but this was the only one, she really liked. So I decided to go on with this. I started a C# WinForms application. The software runs on a wall mounted Shuttle Barebone-PC. First plan was an industrial panel-pc but the processor was too slow. The now-used Atom is ok. I started with the LCARS-controls found on Codeproject. Since the classic LCARS design divides the screen into two parts this tended to be impracticable, so I used my own design For now the software is able to: Switch lights/wall outlets Show current temperatures for all room controllers Show outside temperature with a 24h trend chart Show the status of the two heat pumps Provide an alarm clock (e.g. for cooking) Play internet radio streams Control absence Mute the door bell Speak status messages via speech synthesis For now, I’m working on an integration of my electric meter. The main heat pump and the electric meter are connected to my LAN. I also tried some speech recognition, but I’ve problems with the microphone. I't’s working when you are right in front of the PC, but not far away, let’s say on the other side of the room. So this is the main view. The table displays raw values which are sent over the EIB – completely useless but looks great For each floor I have a different view. Here you can see the temperatures and check the status of the lights (the buttons are blinking when a light is switched on) This is the view for the heat pump:   Next step would be to integrate a control of my squeezebox server (I use different Squeezeboxes through the house as a multiroom audio solution)

    Read the article

  • Speed up loading of test results from builds in Visual Studio

    - by Jakob Ehn
    I still see people complaining about the long time it takes to load test results from a TFS build in Visual Studio. And they make a valid point, it does take a very long time to load the test results, even for a small number of tests. The reason for this is that the test results is not just the result of the test run but also all the binaries that were part of the test run. This often also means that the debug symbols (*.pdb) will be downloaded to your local machine. This reason for this behaviour is that it letsyou re-run the tests locally. However, most of the times this is not what the developer will do, they just want to know which tests failed and why. They can then fix the tests and rerun them locally. It turns out there is a way to load only the test results, which is much faster. The only tricky bit is to find the location of the .trx file that is generated during the build. Particularly in TFS 2010 where you often have multiple build agents, which of corse results in different paths to the trx file. Note: To use this you must have read permission to the build folder on the build agent where the build was executed. Open the build result for the build Click View Log Locate the part where MSTest is invoked. When using test containers, it looks like this:   Note: You can actually search in the log window, press Ctrl+F and you will get a little search box at the bottom. Nice! On the MSTest command line call, locate the /resultsfileroot parameter, which points to the folder where the test results are stored Note that this path is local for the build server, so you need to replace the drive letter with the server name: D:\Builds\Project\TestResults to \Project\TestResults">\\<BuildServer>\Project\TestResults Double-click on the .trx file and you will notice that it loads much faster compared to opening it from the build log window

    Read the article

  • Fedora 13 "Goddard" beta emphasizes automation

    <b>Desktop Linux.com:</b> "The Fedora project released a beta version of Fedora 13 (codenamed "Goddard"). The updated community Linux distribution is touted for features including automatic print-driver installation, the Btrfs filesystem, enhanced 3D driver support, revamped Python bindings, and the Zarafa groupware package, says the project."

    Read the article

  • 10 Steps to Kick-Start Your VMware Automation with PowerCLI

    Virtualization is a powerful technology, but it comes with its own host of monotonous and time-consuming tasks, no matter how big or small your organization is. Eliminating these mind-numbing tasks (and the potential for error which they bring with them) is a goal with striving for, and well within your reach. Jonathan Medd explains.

    Read the article

  • Please recommend the best tools to build a test plan management tool

    - by fzkl
    I have mostly worked on hardware testing in my professional career and would like to get onto the software development side. I thought working on a practically usable project will help motivate me and help acquire some skills. I have decided to build a test plan management tool for the QA team I work in (We use excel sheets!). The test plan management tool should be browser based and should support this: There would be many test plans, each test plan having test sets, test sets having test cases and test cases having instructions, attachments and Pass/fail status marking and bug info in case of failure. It should also have an export to excel option. I have a visual picture of the tool I am looking to build but I don't have enough experience to figure our where to start. My current programming skills are limited to C and shell programming and I want to pick up python. What tools (programming language, database and anything else?) would you recommend for me to get this done? Also what are the key concepts in the recommended programming language that I should focus on to build a browser based tool like this?

    Read the article

  • Linking errors when building against Boost Unit Test Framework

    - by Rafid
    I am trying to use Boost Unit Test Framework by building a stand alone library as detailed here: http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_35_0/libs/test/doc/components/utf/compilation.html So I created a VC library project containing the mentioned files and build it and it was successful. Then I created a test project and referenced the library project I just created, but when I tried to build it, I got the following linking errors: 1>Type.obj : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "bool __cdecl boost::test_tools::tt_detail::check_impl(class boost::test_tools::predicate_result const &,class boost::unit_test::lazy_ostream const &,class boost::unit_test::basic_cstring<char const >,unsigned __int64,enum boost::test_tools::tt_detail::tool_level,enum boost::test_tools::tt_detail::check_type,unsigned __int64,...)" (?check_impl@tt_detail@test_tools@boost@@YA_NAEBVpredicate_result@23@AEBVlazy_ostream@unit_test@3@V?$basic_cstring@$$CBD@63@_KW4tool_level@123@W4check_type@123@3ZZ) referenced in function "public: void __cdecl test1::test_method(void)" (?test_method@test1@@QEAAXXZ) 1>BoostUnitTestFramework.lib(framework.obj) : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "void __cdecl boost::debug::break_memory_alloc(long)" (?break_memory_alloc@debug@boost@@YAXJ@Z) referenced in function "void __cdecl boost::unit_test::framework::init(class boost::unit_test::test_suite * (__cdecl*)(int,char * * const),int,char * * const)" (?init@framework@unit_test@boost@@YAXP6APEAVtest_suite@23@HQEAPEAD@ZH0@Z) 1>BoostUnitTestFramework.lib(framework.obj) : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "void __cdecl boost::debug::detect_memory_leaks(bool)" (?detect_memory_leaks@debug@boost@@YAX_N@Z) referenced in function "void __cdecl boost::unit_test::framework::init(class boost::unit_test::test_suite * (__cdecl*)(int,char * * const),int,char * * const)" (?init@framework@unit_test@boost@@YAXP6APEAVtest_suite@23@HQEAPEAD@ZH0@Z) 1>BoostUnitTestFramework.lib(execution_monitor.obj) : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "bool __cdecl boost::debug::attach_debugger(bool)" (?attach_debugger@debug@boost@@YA_N_N@Z) referenced in function "public: int __cdecl boost::detail::system_signal_exception::operator()(unsigned int,struct _EXCEPTION_POINTERS *)" (??Rsystem_signal_exception@detail@boost@@QEAAHIPEAU_EXCEPTION_POINTERS@@@Z) 1>BoostUnitTestFramework.lib(execution_monitor.obj) : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "bool __cdecl boost::debug::under_debugger(void)" (?under_debugger@debug@boost@@YA_NXZ) referenced in function "public: int __cdecl boost::execution_monitor::execute(class boost::unit_test::callback0<int> const &)" (?execute@execution_monitor@boost@@QEAAHAEBV?$callback0@H@unit_test@2@@Z) 1>BoostUnitTestFramework.lib(unit_test_main.obj) : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "class boost::unit_test::test_suite * __cdecl init_unit_test_suite(int,char * * const)" (?init_unit_test_suite@@YAPEAVtest_suite@unit_test@boost@@HQEAPEAD@Z) referenced in function main 1>C:\Users\Rafid\Workspace\MyPhysics\Builds\VC10\Tests\Debug\Tests.exe : fatal error LNK1120: 6 unresolved externals They seem to be mainly caused by Boost debug library, but I can't see a reason why I should get linking errors putting in mind that Boost debug library only need to be included as header files, rather than linking against as a library! Any ideas?!

    Read the article

  • Mocking with Boost::Test

    - by Billy ONeal
    Hello everyone :) I'm using the Boost::Test library for unit testing, and I've in general been hacking up my own mocking solutions that look something like this: //In header for clients struct RealFindFirstFile { static HANDLE FindFirst(LPCWSTR lpFileName, LPWIN32_FIND_DATAW lpFindFileData) { return FindFirstFile(lpFileName, lpFindFileData); }; }; template <typename FirstFile_T = RealFindFirstFile> class DirectoryIterator { //.. Implementation } //In unit tests (cpp) #define THE_ANSWER_TO_LIFE_THE_UNIVERSE_AND_EVERYTHING 42 struct FakeFindFirstFile { static HANDLE FindFirst(LPCWSTR lpFileName, LPWIN32_FIND_DATAW lpFindFileData) { return THE_ANSWER_TO_LIFE_THE_UNIVERSE_AND_EVERYTHING; }; }; BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE( MyTest ) { DirectoryIterator<FakeFindFirstFile> LookMaImMocked; //Test } I've grown frustrated with this because it requires that I implement almost everything as a template, and it is a lot of boilerplate code to achieve what I'm looking for. Is there a good method of mocking up code using Boost::Test over my Ad-hoc method? I've seen several people recommend Google Mock, but it requires a lot of ugly hacks if your functions are not virtual, which I would like to avoid. Oh: One last thing. I don't need assertions that a particular piece of code was called. I simply need to be able to inject data that would normally be returned by Windows API functions.

    Read the article

  • Need MySQL RLIKE expression to exclude certain strings ending in particular characters...

    - by user299508
    So I've been working with RLIKE to pull some data in a new application and mostly enjoying it. To date I've been using RLIKE queries to return 3 types of results (files, directories and everything). The queries (and example results) follow: **All**: SELECT * FROM public WHERE obj_owner_id='test' AND obj_namespace RLIKE '^user/test/public/[-0-9a-z_./]+$' ORDER BY obj_namespace user/test/public/a-test/.comment user/test/public/a-test/.delete user/test/public/directory/ user/test/public/directory/image.jpg user/test/public/index user/test/public/site-rip user/test/public/site-rip2 user/test/public/test-a user/test/public/widget-test **Files**: SELECT * FROM public WHERE obj_owner_id='test' AND obj_namespace RLIKE '^user/test/public/[-0-9a-z_./]+[-0-9a-z_.]+$' ORDER BY obj_namespace user/test/public/a-test/.comment user/test/public/a-test/.delete user/test/public/directory/image.jpg user/test/public/index user/test/public/site-rip user/test/public/site-rip2 user/test/public/test-a user/test/public/widget-test **Directories**: SELECT * FROM public WHERE obj_owner_id='test' AND obj_namespace RLIKE '^user/test/public/[-0-9a-z_./]+/$' ORDER BY obj_namespace user/test/public/directory/ This works well for the above 3 basic scenarios but under certain situations I'll be including special 'suffixes' I'd like to be excluded from the results of queries (without having to resort to PHP functions to do it). A good example of such a string would be: user/test/public/a-test/.delete That data (there are more rows then just obj_namespace) is considered deleted and in the Files and All type queries I'd like it to be omitted within the expression if possible. Same goes for the /.comments and all such meta data will always be in the same format: /.[sometext] I'd hoped to use this feature extensively throughout my application, so I'm hoping there might be a very simple answer. (crosses fingers) Anyway, thanks as always for any/all responses and feedback.

    Read the article

  • Unit tests and Test Runner problems under .Net 4.0

    - by Brett Rigby
    Hi there, We're trying to migrate a .Net 3.5 solution into .Net 4.0, but are experiencing complications with the testing frameworks that can operate using an assembly that is built using version 4.0 of the .Net Framework. Previously, we used NUnit 2.4.3.0 and NCover 1.5.8.0 within our NAnt scripts, but NUnit 2.4.3.0 doesn't like .Net 4.0 projects. So, we upgraded to a newer version of the NUnit framework within the test project itself, but then found that NCover 1.5.8.0 doesn't support this version of NUnit. We get errors in the code saying words to the effect of the assembly was built using a newer version of the .Net Framework than is currently in use, as it's using .Net Framework 2.0 to run the tools. We then tried using Gallio's Icarus test runner GUI, but found that this and MbUnit only support up to version 3.5 of the .Net Frameword and the result is "the tests will be ignored". In terms of the coverage side of things (for reporting into CruiseControl.net), we have found that PartCover is a good candidate for substituting-out NCover, (as the newer version of NCover is quite dear, and PartCover is free), but this is a few steps down the line yet, as we can't get the test runners to work first!! Can any shed any light on a testnig framework that will run under .Net 4.0 in the same way as I've described above? If not, I fear we may have to revert back to using .Net 3.5 until the manufacturers of the tooling that we're currently using have a chance to upgrade to .Net 4.0. Thanks.

    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

  • Automated Acceptance tests under specific contraints

    - by HH_
    This is a follow up to my previous question, which was a bit general, so I'll be asking for a more precise situation. I want to automate acceptance testing on a web application. Briefly, this application allows the user to create contracts for subscribers with the two constraints: You cannot create more than one contract for a subscriber. Once a contract is created, it cannot be deleted (from the UI) Let's say TestCreate is a test case with tests for the normal creation of a contract. The constraints have introduced complexities to the testing process, mainly dependencies between test cases and test executions. Before we run TestCreate we need to make sure that the application is in a suitable state (the subscriber has no contract) If we run TestCreate twice, the second run will fail since the state of the application will have changed. So we need to revert back to the initial state (i.e. delete the contract), which is impossible to do from the UI. More generally, after each test case we should guarantee that the state is reverted back. And since, in this case, it is impossible to do it from the UI, how do you handle this? Possible solution: I thought about doing a backup of the database in the state that I desire, and after each test case, run a script which deletes the db and restores the backup. However, I find that to be too heavy to do for each single test case. In addition, what if some information are stored in files? or in multiple or unaccessible databases? My question: In this situation, what would an experienced tester do to write automated and maintanable tests. Thank you. More info: I'm trying to integrate tests into a BDD framework, which I find to be a neat solution for test documentation and communication, but it does not solve this particular problem (it even makes it harder)

    Read the article

  • Test Doubles : Do they go in "source packages" or "test packages"?

    - by sbrattla
    I've got a couple of data access objects (DefaultPersonServices.class, DefaultAddressServices.class) which is responsible for various CRUD operations in a database. A few different classes use these services, but as the services requires that a connection is established with a database I can't really use them in unit tests as they take too long. Thus, I'd like to create a test doubles for them and simply do FakePersonServices.class and FakeAddressService.class implementations which I can use throughout testing. Now, this is all good (I assume)...but my question relates to where I put the test doubles. Should I keep them along with the default implementations (aka "real" implementations) or should I keep them in a corresponding test package. The default implementations are found in Source Packages : com.company.data.services. Should I keep the test doubles here too, or should the test doubles rather be in Test Packages : com.company.data.services?

    Read the article

  • How do people maintain their test suite?

    - by Ida
    In particular, I'm curious about the following aspects: How do you know that your test cases are wrong (or out-of-date) and needed to be repaired (or discarded)? I mean, even if a test case became invalid, it might still pass and remain silent, which could let you falsely believe that your software works okay. So how do you realize such problems of your test suite? How do you know that your test suite is no longer sufficient and that new test cases should be added? I guess this has something to do with the requirement changes, but is there any systematic approach to check the adequacy of test suite?

    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

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 | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >