Search Results

Search found 22986 results on 920 pages for 'allocation unit size'.

Page 113/920 | < Previous Page | 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120  | Next Page >

  • Get/save parameters to an expected JMock method call?

    - by Tayeb
    Hi, I want to test an "Adapter" object that when it receives an xml message, it digest it to a Message object, puts message ID + CorrelationID both with timestamps and forwards it to a Client object.=20 A message can be correlated to a previous one (e.g. m2.correlationID =3D m1.ID). I mock the Client, and check that Adapter successfully calls "client.forwardMessage(m)" twice with first message with null correlationID, and a second with a not-null correlationID. However, I would like to precisely test that the correlationIDs are set correctly, by grabing the IDs (e.g. m1.ID). But I couldn't find anyway to do so. There is a jira about adding the feature, but no one commented and it is unassigned. Is this really unimplemented? I read about the alternative of redesigning the Adapter to use an IdGenerator object, which I can stub, but I think there will be too many objects.=20 Don't you think it adds unnecessary complexity to split objects to a so fine granularity? Thanks, and I appreciate any comments :-) Tayeb

    Read the article

  • Nested Resource testing RSpec

    - by Joseph DelCioppio
    I have two models: class Solution < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :owner, :class_name => "User", :foreign_key => :user_id end class User < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :solutions end with the following routing: map.resources :users, :has_many => :solutions and here is the SolutionsController: class SolutionsController < ApplicationController before_filter :load_user def index @solutions = @user.solutions end private def load_user @user = User.find(params[:user_id]) unless params[:user_id].nil? end end Can anybody help me with writing a test for the index action? So far I have tried the following but it doesn't work: describe SolutionsController do before(:each) do @user = Factory.create(:user) @solutions = 7.times{Factory.build(:solution, :owner => @user)} @user.stub!(:solutions).and_return(@solutions) end it "should find all of the solutions owned by a user" do @user.should_receive(:solutions) get :index, :user_id => @user.id end end And I get the following error: Spec::Mocks::MockExpectationError in 'SolutionsController GET index, when the user owns the software he is viewing should find all of the solutions owned by a user' #<User:0x000000041c53e0> expected :solutions with (any args) once, but received it 0 times Thanks in advance for all the help. Joe

    Read the article

  • where to put the unittest for library in rails

    - by lidaobing
    Hello, I am a ruby and rails newbie. And I am working on a rails application with RadRails. RadRails has a "Switch to Test" function for my controller, model, etc. but not for my library. if I have class Foo::Bar in /lib/foo/bar.rb, where should I put the unittest for it? or should I separate the foo library in a separated project? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Python: How to run unittest.main() for all source files in a subdirectory?

    - by Pete
    I am developing a Python module with several source files, each with its own test class derived from unittest right in the source. Consider the directory structure: dirFoo\ test.py dirBar\ __init__.py Foo.py Bar.py To test either Foo.py or Bar.py, I would add this at the end of the Foo.py and Bar.py source files: if __name__ == "__main__": unittest.main() And run Python on either source, i.e. $ python Foo.py ........... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ran 11 tests in 2.314s OK Ideally, I would have "test.py" automagically search dirBar for any unittest derived classes and make one call to "unittest.main()". What's the best way to do this in practice? I tried using Python to call execfile for every *.py file in dirBar, which runs once for the first .py file found & exits the calling test.py, plus then I have to duplicate my code by adding unittest.main() in every source file--which violates DRY principles.

    Read the article

  • Python unittest with expensive setup

    - by Staale
    My test file is basically: class Test(unittest.TestCase): def testOk(): pass if __name__ == "__main__": expensiveSetup() try: unittest.main() finally: cleanUp() However, I do wish to run my test through Netbeans testing tools, and to do that I need unittests that don't rely on an environment setup done in main. Looking at http://stackoverflow.com/questions/402483/caching-result-of-setup-using-python-unittest - it recommends using Nose. However, I don't think Netbeans supports this. I didn't find any information indicating that it does. Additionally, I am the only one here actually writing tests, so I don't want to introduce additional dependencies for the other 2 developers unless they are needed. How can I do the setup and cleanup once for all the tests in my TestSuite? The expensive setup here is creating some files with dummy data, as well as setting up and tearing down a simple xml-rpc server. I also have 2 test classes, one testing locally and one testing all methods over xml-rpc.

    Read the article

  • Multiple asserts in single test?

    - by Gern Blandston
    Let's say I want to write a function that validates an email address with a regex. I write a little test to check my function and write the actual function. Make it pass. However, I can come up with a bunch of different ways to test the same function ([email protected]; [email protected]; test.test.com, etc). Do I put all the incantations that I need to check in the same, single test with several ASSERTS or do I write a new test for every single thing I can think of? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Why should I be using testing frameworks in PHP?

    - by Industrial
    Hi everyone, I have recently heard a lot of people argue about using PHP testing features like PHPunit and SimpleTest together with their IDE of choice (Eclipse for me). After googling the subject, I have still a hard time understanding the pros and cons of using these testing frameworks to speed up development. If anyone could explain this for me in a more basic level, I would really appreciate it. I am using PHP5 for the notice. Thanks a lot!

    Read the article

  • Using Assert to compare two objects

    - by baron
    Hi everyone, Writing test cases for my project, one test I need is to test deletion. This may not exactly be the right way to go about it, but I've stumbled upon something which isn't making sense to me. Code is like this: [Test] private void DeleteFruit() { BuildTestData(); var f1 = new Fruit("Banana",1,1.5); var f2 = new Fruit("Apple",1,1.5); fm.DeleteFruit(f1,listOfFruit); Assert.That(listOfFruit[1] == f2); } Now the fruit object I create line 5 is the object that I know should be in that position (with this specific dataset) after f1 is deleted. Also if I sit and debug, and manually compare objects listOfFruit[1] and f2 they are the same. But that Assert line fails. What gives?

    Read the article

  • How to test a site rigorously?

    - by Sarfraz
    Hello, I recently created a big portal site. It's time for putting it to test. How do you guys test a site rigorously? What are the ways and tools for that? Can we sort of mimic hundreds of virtual users visiting the site to see its load handling? The test should be for both security and speed Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Argument constraints in RhinoMock methods

    - by Khash
    I am mocking a repository that should have 1 entity in it for the test scenario. The repository has to return this entity based on a known id and return nothing when other ids are passed in. I have tried doing something like this: _myRepository.Expect(item => item.Find(knownId)).Return(knownEntity); _myRepository.Expect(item => item.Find(Arg<Guid>.Is.Anything)).Return(null); It seems however the second line is overriding the first and the repository always returns null. I don't want to mock all the different possible IDs asked (they could go up to hundreds) when the test scenario is only concerned with the value of one Id.

    Read the article

  • Is Assert.Fail() considered bad practice?

    - by Mendelt
    I use Assert.Fail a lot when doing TDD. I'm usually working on one test at a time but when I get ideas for things I want to implement later I quickly write an empty test where the name of the test method indicates what I want to implement as sort of a todo-list. To make sure I don't forget I put an Assert.Fail() in the body. When trying out xUnit.Net I found they hadn't implemented Assert.Fail. Of course you can always Assert.IsTrue(false) but this doesn't communicate my intention as well. I got the impression Assert.Fail wasn't implemented on purpose. Is this considered bad practice? If so why? @Martin Meredith That's not exactly what I do. I do write a test first and then implement code to make it work. Usually I think of several tests at once. Or I think about a test to write when I'm working on something else. That's when I write an empty failing test to remember. By the time I get to writing the test I neatly work test-first. @Jimmeh That looks like a good idea. Ignored tests don't fail but they still show up in a separate list. Have to try that out. @Matt Howells Great Idea. NotImplementedException communicates intention better than assert.Fail() in this case @Mitch Wheat That's what I was looking for. It seems it was left out to prevent it being abused in another way I abuse it.

    Read the article

  • Does new JUnit 4.8 @Category render test suites almost obsolete?

    - by grigory
    Given question 'How to run all tests belonging to a certain Category?' and the answer would the following approach be better for test organization? define master test suite that contains all tests (e.g. using ClasspathSuite) design sufficient set of JUnit categories (sufficient means that every desirable collection of sets is identifiable using one or more categories) define targeted test suites based on master test suite and set of categories For example: identify categories for speed (slow, fast), dependencies (mock, database, integration), function (), domain ( demand that each test is properly qualified (tagged) with relevant set of categories. create master test suite using ClasspathSuite (all tests found in classpath) create targeted suites by qualifying master test suite with categories, e.g. mock test suite, fast database test suite, slow integration for domain X test suite, etc. My question is more like soliciting approval rate for such approach vs. classic test suite approach. One unbeatable benefit is that every new test is immediately contained by relevant suites with no suite maintenance. One concern is proper categorization of each test.

    Read the article

  • What will we use Theory Attribute for ?

    - by Sandbox
    I discovered [Theory] and [Datapoint] attributes in NUnit. I am not very sure about how should I use these. I think they can be used for data-driven testing and this has got me interested. There aren't many resources available on the same. Can someone explain to me how to use them or point me to resources? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Is there a library available which easily can record and replay results of API calls?

    - by Billy ONeal
    I'm working on writing various things that call relatively complicated Win32 API functions. Here's an example: //Encapsulates calling NtQuerySystemInformation buffer management. WindowsApi::AutoArray NtDll::NtQuerySystemInformation( SystemInformationClass toGet ) const { AutoArray result; ULONG allocationSize = 1024; ULONG previousSize; NTSTATUS errorCheck; do { previousSize = allocationSize; result.Allocate(allocationSize); errorCheck = WinQuerySystemInformation(toGet, result.GetAs<void>(), allocationSize, &allocationSize); if (allocationSize <= previousSize) allocationSize = previousSize * 2; } while (errorCheck == 0xC0000004L); if (errorCheck != 0) { THROW_MANUAL_WINDOWS_ERROR(WinRtlNtStatusToDosError(errorCheck)); } return result; } //Client of the above. ProcessSnapshot::ProcessSnapshot() { using Dll::NtDll; NtDll ntdll; AutoArray systemInfoBuffer = ntdll.NtQuerySystemInformation( NtDll::SystemProcessInformation); BYTE * currentPtr = systemInfoBuffer.GetAs<BYTE>(); //Loop through the results, creating Process objects. SYSTEM_PROCESSES * asSysInfo; do { // Loop book keeping asSysInfo = reinterpret_cast<SYSTEM_PROCESSES *>(currentPtr); currentPtr += asSysInfo->NextEntryDelta; //Create the process for the current iteration and fill it with data. std::auto_ptr<ProcImpl> currentProc(ProcFactory( static_cast<unsigned __int32>(asSysInfo->ProcessId), this)); NormalProcess* nptr = dynamic_cast<NormalProcess*>(currentProc.get()); if (nptr) { nptr->SetProcessName(asSysInfo->ProcessName); } // Populate process threads for(ULONG idx = 0; idx < asSysInfo->ThreadCount; ++idx) { SYSTEM_THREADS& sysThread = asSysInfo->Threads[idx]; Thread thread( currentProc.get(), static_cast<unsigned __int32>(sysThread.ClientId.UniqueThread), sysThread.StartAddress); currentProc->AddThread(thread); } processes.push_back(currentProc); } while(asSysInfo->NextEntryDelta != 0); } My problem is in mocking out the NtDll::NtQuerySystemInformation method -- namely, that the data structure returned is complicated (Well, here it's actually relatively simple but it can be complicated), and writing a test which builds the data structure like the API call does can take 5-6 times as long as writing the code that uses the API. What I'd like to do is take a call to the API, and record it somehow, so that I can return that recorded value to the code under test without actually calling the API. The returned structures cannot simply be memcpy'd, because they often contain inner pointers (pointers to other locations in the same buffer). The library in question would need to check for these kinds of things, and be able to restore pointer values to a similar buffer upon replay. (i.e. check each pointer sized value if it could be interpreted as a pointer within the buffer, change that to an offset, and remember to change it back to a pointer on replay -- a false positive rate here is acceptable) Is there anything out there that does anything like this?

    Read the article

  • Specify test method name prefix for test suite in junit 3

    - by Marko Kocic
    Is it possible to tell JUnit 3 to use additional method name prefix when looking up test method names? The goal is to have additional tests running locally that should not be run on continuous integration server. CI server doesn't use test suites, it look up for all classes which name ends with "Test" and execute all methods that begins with "test". The goal is to be able to locally run not only tests run by integration server, but also tests which method name starts with, for example "nocitest" or something like that. I don't mind having to organize tests into tests suite locally, since CI is just ignoring them.

    Read the article

  • How to rewrite data-driven test suites of JUnit 3 in Junit 4?

    - by rics
    I am using data-driven test suites running JUnit 3 based on Rainsberger's JUnit Recipes. The purpose of these tests is to check whether a certain function is properly implemented related to a set of input-output pairs. Here is the definition of the test suite: public static Test suite() throws Exception { TestSuite suite = new TestSuite(); Calendar calendar = GregorianCalendar.getInstance(); calendar.set(2009, 8, 05, 13, 23); // 2009. 09. 05. 13:23 java.sql.Date date = new java.sql.Date(calendar.getTime().getTime()); suite.addTest(new DateFormatTestToString(date, JtDateFormat.FormatType.YYYY_MON_DD, "2009-SEP-05")); suite.addTest(new DateFormatTestToString(date, JtDateFormat.FormatType.DD_MON_YYYY, "05/SEP/2009")); return suite; } and the definition of the testing class: public class DateFormatTestToString extends TestCase { private java.sql.Date date; private JtDateFormat.FormatType dateFormat; private String expectedStringFormat; public DateFormatTestToString(java.sql.Date date, JtDateFormat.FormatType dateFormat, String expectedStringFormat) { super("testGetString"); this.date = date; this.dateFormat = dateFormat; this.expectedStringFormat = expectedStringFormat; } public void testGetString() { String result = JtDateFormat.getString(date, dateFormat); assertTrue( expectedStringFormat.equalsIgnoreCase(result)); } } How is it possible to test several input-output parameters of a method using JUnit 4? This question and the answers explained to me the distinction between JUnit 3 and 4 in this regard. This question and the answers describe the way to create test suite for a set of class but not for a method with a set of different parameters.

    Read the article

  • Reduce file size for charts pasted from excel into word

    - by Steve Clanton
    I have been creating reports by copying some charts and data from an excel document into a word document. I am pasting into a content control, so i use ChartObject.CopyPicture in excel and ContentControl.Range.Paste in word. This is done in a loop: Set ws = ThisWorkbook.Worksheets("Charts") With ws For Each cc In wordDocument.ContentControls If cc.Range.InlineShapes.Count > 0 Then scaleHeight = cc.Range.InlineShapes(1).scaleHeight scaleWidth = cc.Range.InlineShapes(1).scaleWidth cc.Range.InlineShapes(1).Delete .ChartObjects(cc.Tag).CopyPicture Appearance:=xlScreen, Format:=xlPicture cc.Range.Paste cc.Range.InlineShapes(1).scaleHeight = scaleHeight cc.Range.InlineShapes(1).scaleWidth = scaleWidth ElseIf ... Next cc End With Creating these reports using Office 2007 yielded files that were around 6MB, but creating them (using the same worksheet and document) in Office 2010 yields a file that is around 10 times as large. After unzipping the docx, I found that the extra size comes from emf files that correspond to charts that are pasted in using VBA. Where they range from 360 to 900 KB before, they are 5-18 MB. And the graphics are not visibly better. I am able to CopyPicture with the format xlBitmap, and while that is somewhat smaller, it is larger than the emf generated by Office 2007 and noticeably poorer quality. Are there any other options for reducing the file size? Ideally, I would like to produce a file with the same resolution for the charts as I did using Office 2007. Is there any way that uses VBA only (without modifying the charts in the spreadsheet)?

    Read the article

  • Testing methods called on yielded object

    - by Todd R
    I have the following controller test case: def test_showplain Cleaner.expect(:parse).with(@somecontent) Cleaner.any_instance.stubs(:plainversion).returns(@returnvalue) post :showplain, {:content => @somecontent} end This works fine, except that I want the "stubs(:plainversion)" to be an "expects(:plainversion)". Here's the controller code: def showplain Cleaner.parse(params[:content]) do | cleaner | @output = cleaner.plainversion end end And the Cleaner is simply: class Cleaner ### other code and methods ### def self.parse(@content) cleaner = Cleaner.new(@content) yield cleaner cleaner.close end def plainversion ### operate on @content and return ### end end Again, I can't figure out how to reliably test the "cleaner" that is made available from the "parse" method. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Looking for Info on a Javascript Testing framework

    - by DaveDev
    Hi Can somebody fill me in on JavaScript Testing Frameworks? I'm working on a project now and as the JS (Mostly jQuery) libraries grow, it's getting more and more difficult to introduce change or refactor, because I have no way of guaranteeing the accuracy of the code without manually testing everything. I don't really know anything about JavaScript Testing Frameworks, or how they integrate/operate in a .Net project, so I thought I'd ask here. What would a good testing framework be for .Net? What does a JavaScript test look like? (e.g. with NUnit, I have [TestFixture] classes & [Test] methods in a ProjectTests assembly) How do I run a javascript test? What are the conceptual differences between testing JS & testing C#? Is there anything else that would be worth knowing? Thanks Dave

    Read the article

  • Using content from the project in tests

    - by oillio
    I am working with Visual Studio 2010 and it's integrated testing functionality. I have an XML file in my project which is set to copy to the output directory. I can access the file just fine when I compile and run the project. But it doesn't exist when I attempt to access it within a TestMethod. It looks like the test is run with the working directory set to an "Out" directory created within the TestResults directory. I can set a breakpoint before I use the file. If I then copy the file into this "Out" directory and continue running the test it accesses the file properly. But that is not really how I want my automated tests to function. Is it possible to tell VS to copy the build directory into this working directory?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120  | Next Page >