Search Results

Search found 11400 results on 456 pages for 'automated testing'.

Page 115/456 | < Previous Page | 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122  | Next Page >

  • how to write a script that logs into an application and checks a page

    - by josh
    Is it possible to write a script that will login to an application using uname/pwd? the username/password are not passed in through POST (they dont come in the URL) Basic steps I am looking for are: Visit url enter uname/pwd click a button click a link get the raw html to make sure it does not have 500 error Is that possible to do in any language? Please point me to some examples as well

    Read the article

  • Stubbing a before_filter with RSpec

    - by TheDelChop
    Guys, I'm having trouble understanding why I can't seem to stub this controller method :load_user, since all of my tests fail if I change the actual implementation of :load_user to not return and instance of @user. Can anybody see why my stub (controller.stub!(:load_user).and_return(@user)) seems to fail to actually get called when RSpec makes a request to the controller? require 'spec_helper' describe TasksController do before(:each) do @user = Factory(:user) sign_in @user @task = Factory(:task) User.stub_chain(:where, :first).and_return(@user) controller.stub!(:load_user).and_return(@user) end #GET Index describe "GET Index" do before(:each) do @tasks = 7.times{Factory(:task, :user = @user)} @user.stub!(:tasks).and_return(@tasks) end it "should should find all of the tasks owned by a user" do @user.should_receive(:tasks).and_return(@tasks) get :index, :user_id = @user.id end it "should assign all of the user's tasks to the view" do get :index, :user_id = @user.id assigns[:tasks].should be(@tasks) end end #GET New describe "GET New" do before(:each) do @user.stub_chain(:tasks, :new).and_return(@task) end it "should return a new Task" do @user.tasks.should_receive(:new).and_return(@task) get :new, :user_id = @user.id end end #POST Create describe "POST Create" do before(:each) do @user.stub_chain(:tasks, :new).and_return(@task) end it "should create a new task" do @user.tasks.should_receive(:new).and_return(@task) post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task.to_s end it "saves the task" do @task.should_receive(:save) post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task end context "when the task is saved successfully" do before(:each) do @task.stub!(:save).and_return(true) end it "should set the flash[:notice] message to 'Task Added Successfully'"do post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task flash[:notice].should == "Task Added Successfully!" end it "should redirect to the user's task page" do post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task response.should redirect_to(user_tasks_path(@user.id)) end end context "when the task isn't saved successfully" do before(:each) do @task.stub(:save).and_return(false) end it "should return to the 'Create New Task' page do" do post :create, :user_id = @user.id, :task = @task response.should render_template('new') end end end it "should attempt to authenticate and load the user who owns the tasks" do context "when the tasks belong to the currently logged in user" do it "should set the user instance variable to the currently logged in user" do pending end end context "when the tasks belong to another user" do it "should set the flash[:notice] to 'Sorry but you can't view other people's tasks.'" do pending end it "should redirect to the home page" do pending end end end end class TasksController < ApplicationController before_filter :load_user def index @tasks = @user.tasks end def new @task = @user.tasks.new end def create @task = @user.tasks.new if @task.save flash[:notice] = "Task Added Successfully!" redirect_to user_tasks_path(@user.id) else render :action => 'new' end end private def load_user if current_user.id == params[:user_id].to_i @user = User.where(:id => params[:user_id]).first else flash[:notice] = "Sorry but you can't view other people's tasks." redirect_to root_path end end end Can anybody see why my stub doesnt' work? Like I said, my tests only pass if I make sure that load_user works, if not, all my tests fail which makes my think that RSpec isn't using the stub I created. Thanks, Joe

    Read the article

  • How do I make this ASP.NET MVC controller more testable?

    - by Ragesh
    I have a controller that overrides OnActionExecuting and does something like this: protected override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) { base.OnActionExecuting(filterContext); string tenantDomain = filterContext.RouteData.Values["tenantDomain"] as string; if (!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(tenantDomain)) { using (var tx = BeginTransaction()) { this.Tenant = repo.FindOne(t => t.Domain == tenantDomain); } } } Tenant is a protected property with a private setter. The class itself is an abstract base controller that my real controllers derive from. I have code in other controllers that looks a lot like this: if (Tenant == null) { // Do something } else { // Do something else } How do I test this code? What I need to do is to somehow set the Tenant property, but I can't because: It's a protected property, and It has a private setter Changing the visibility of Tenant doesn't "feel" right. What are my alternatives to unit test my derived controllers?

    Read the article

  • Mocking imported modules in Python

    - by Evgenyt
    I'm trying to implement unit tests for function that uses imported external objects. For example helpers.py is: import os import pylons def some_func(arg): ... var1 = os.path.exist(...) var2 = os.path.getmtime(...) var3 = pylons.request.environ['HTTP_HOST'] ... So when I'm creating unit test for it I do some mocking (minimock in my case) and replacing references to pylons.request and os.path: import helpers def test_some_func(): helpers.pylons.request = minimock.Mock("pylons.request") helpers.pylons.request.environ = { 'HTTP_HOST': "localhost" } helpers.os.path = minimock.Mock(....) ... some_func(...) # assert ... This does not look good for me. Is there any other better way or strategy to substitute imported function/objects in Python?

    Read the article

  • defining a simple implicit Arbitary

    - by FredOverflow
    I have a type Foo with a constructor that takes an Int. How do I define an implicit Arbitrary for Foo to be used with scalacheck? implicit def arbFoo: Arbitrary[Foo] = ??? I came up with the following solution, but it's a bit too "manual" and low-level for my taste: val fooGen = for (i <- Gen.choose(Int.MinValue, Int.MaxValue)) yield new Foo(i) implicit def arbFoo: Arbitrary[Foo] = Arbitrary(fooGen) Ideally, I would want a higher-order function where I just have to plug in an Int => Foo function. I managed to cut it down to: implicit def arbFoo = Arbitrary(Gen.resultOf((i: Int) => new Foo(i))) But I still feel like there has got to be a slightly simpler way.

    Read the article

  • How to test my GAE site for performance

    - by Sergey Basharov
    I am building a GAE site that uses AJAX/JSON for almost all its tasks including building the UI elements, all interactions and client-server requests. What is a good way to test it for highloads so that I could have some statistics about how much resources 1000 average users per some period of time would take. I think I can create some Python functions for this purpose. What can you advise? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Git: Run through a filter before commiting/pushing?

    - by martiert
    Hi. Is there a way to run the changed files through a filter before doing the commit? I wish to make sure the files follows the coding standards for the project. I would also like to compile and run some test before the commit/push actually takes place, so I know everything in the repo actually works.

    Read the article

  • Mock a void method which change the input value

    - by Kar
    Hi, How could I mock a void method with parameters and change the value parameters? My void method looks like this: public interface IFoo { void GetValue(int x, object y) // takes x and do something then access another class to get the value of y } I prepared a delegate class: private delegate void GetValueDelegate(int x, object y); private void GetValue(int x, object y) { // process x // prepare a new object obj if (y == null) y = new Object(); if (//some checks) y = obj; } I wrote something like this: Expect.Call(delegate {x.GetValue(5, null);}).Do (new GetValueDelegate(GetValue)).IgnoreArguments().Repeat.Any(); But seems like it's not working. Any clue on what could be wrong?

    Read the article

  • Rhino Mocks - Do we really need stubs?

    - by Marcelo Oliveira
    If it's possible to change mock behaviour in Rhino Mocks using mock.Stub().Return(), why do we need Stubs anyway? What do we lose by always using MockRepository.GenerateMock()? One big benefit of using Mocks instead of Stubs is that we will be able to reuse the same instance among all the tests keeping them cleaner and straightforward. The moq framework works in a similar way... we don't have different objects for mocks and stubs. (please, don't answer with a link to Fowler's "Mocks aren't stubs" article)

    Read the article

  • Any special assertion to test if the resulting integer lies within a range

    - by barerd
    I would like to test if an instance variable lies in a range of numbers. I solved the problem by using assert_in_delta but would like to know if there is a formal assertion for this. #part of the tested class def initialize(value = 70 + rand(30)) @value = value end #test_value.rb class ValueTestCase < Test::Unit::TestCase def test_if_value_in_range assert_in_delta(85, p.value, 15) end end

    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

  • DDSteps date question.

    - by Srini
    DDStep Date Question: Currently trying to pass just the date from excel. But getting the below error while doing it. Failed to convert property value of type [java.lang.String] to required type [java.util.Date] for property ...no matching editors or conversion strategy found spring for date conversion I even tried to add customEditorConfigurer in the ddsteps-context file. Still getting error. But in their pet store example looks like it works fine. Any help is appreciated. <entry key="java.util.Date"> <bean class="org.springframework.beans.propertyeditors.CustomDateEditor"> <constructor-arg> <bean class="java.text.SimpleDateFormat"> <constructor-arg value="yyyy-MM-dd" /> </bean> </constructor-arg> <constructor-arg value="false" /> </bean> </entry>

    Read the article

  • How can I unit test a PHP class method that executes a command-line program?

    - by acoulton
    For a PHP application I'm developing, I need to read the current git revision SHA which of course I can get easily by using shell_exec or backticks to execute the git command line client. I have obviously put this call into a method of its very own, so that I can easily isolate and mock this for the rest of my unit tests. So my class looks a bit like this: class Task_Bundle { public function execute() { // Do things $revision = $this->git_sha(); // Do more things } protected function git_sha() { return `git rev-parse --short HEAD`; } } Of course, although I can test most of the class by mocking git_sha, I'm struggling to see how to test the actual git_sha() method because I don't see a way to create a known state for it. I don't think there's any real value in a unit test that also calls git rev-parse to compare the results? I was wondering about at least asserting that the command had been run, but I can't see any way to get a history of shell commands executed by PHP - even if I specify that PHP should use BASH rather than SH the history list comes up empty, I presume because the separate backticks executions are separate terminal sessions. I'd love to hear any suggestions for how I might test this, or is it OK to just leave that method untested and be careful with it when the app is being maintained in future?

    Read the article

  • Passing a paramter/object to a ruby unit/test before running it using TestRunner

    - by Nahir Khan
    I'm building a tool that automates a process then runs some tests on it's own results then goes to do some other stuff. In trying to clean up my code I have created a separate file that just has the test cases class. Now before I can run these tests, I have to pass the class a couple of parameters/objects before they can be run. Now the problem is that I can't seem to find a way to pass a parameter/object to the test class. Right now I am thinking to generate a Yaml file and read it in the test class but it feels "wrong" to use a temporary file for this. If anyone has a nicer solution that would be great! *********Edit******* Example Code of what I am doing right now: #!/usr/bin/ruby require 'test/unit/ui/console/testrunner' require 'yaml' require 'TS_SampleTestSuite' automatingSomething() importantInfo = getImportantInfo() File.open('filename.yml', 'w') do |f| f.puts importantInfo.to_yaml end Test::Unit::UI::Console::TestRunner.run(TS_SampleTestSuite) Now in the example above TS_SampleTestSuite needs importantInfo, so the first "test case" is a method that just reads in the information from the Yaml file filname.yml. I hope that clears up some confusion.

    Read the article

  • Reflection in unit tests for checking code coverage

    - by Gary
    Here's the scenario. I have VO (Value Objects) or DTO objects that are just containers for data. When I take those and split them apart for saving into a DB that (for lots of reasons) doesn't map to the VO's elegantly, I want to test to see if each field is successfully being created in the database and successfully read back in to rebuild the VO. Is there a way I can test that my tests cover every field in the VO? I had an idea about using reflection to iterate through the fields of the VO's as part of the solution, but maybe you guys have solved the problem before? I want this test to fail when I add fields in the VO, and don't remember to add checks for it in my tests.

    Read the article

  • Running single test class or group with Surefire and TestNG

    - by Slartibartfast
    I want to run single test class from command line using Maven and TestNG Things that doesn't work: mvn -Dtest=ClassName test I have defined groups in pom.xml, and this class isn't in one of those groups. So it got excluded on those grounds. mvn -Dgroups=skipped-group test mvn -Dsurefire.groups=skipped-group test when config is <plugin> <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId> <artifactId>maven-surefire-plugin</artifactId> <version>2.7.1</version> <configuration> <groups>functest</groups> </configuration> </plugin> Parameters work fine in there are no groups defined in pom.xml. Similarly, when surefire is configured with <configuration> <includes> <include>**/*UnitTest.java</include> </includes> </configuration> I can add another test with -Dtest parameter, but cannot add group. In any combination, I can narrow down tests to be executed with groups, but not expand them. What's wrong with my configuration? Is there a way to run a single test or group outside of those defined in pom.xml? Tried on Ubuntu 10.04 with Maven 2.2.1, TestNG 5.14.6 and Surefire 2.7.1

    Read the article

  • what kind of credentials/prerequisites do you need to be a professional penetration tester ?

    - by dfafa
    does it take more than knowing Bt4 ? are there any one that just runs a scanner and no real labor involved ? would you be expected to be able to code your own exploits without having to dl from milw0rm and discover entry into a system by yourself, in other words, do you have to think outside the box even when there's so many tools that makes the job a lot easier ? would you ever be expected to be able to write your own scanners, exploits and etc ? i am also curious how people are able to write long pages of hex address, that magically causes some type of memory overflow...how are people guessing at the hex values for game hacks for instance ? are certification important ? what about formal school education ? I am a CS major.

    Read the article

  • How to test the performance of a user's PC in/for Flash?

    - by Jan P.
    Hey, I'm a developer on nice space MMO using Flash. On new PCs performance is quite good, but some features shouldn't be enabled on older PCs because the framerate drops to shit if we do. Flash wasn't made for this, but hey, pushing boundaries is fun. An example is fullscreen mode. Of course every user can manually enable it, but "advertising" it to a user with and oldie PC would be a bad idea - but for the Alienware crowd it would be dumb not to. So I want to find out how "capable" a user's PC is to decide if I should enable or disable some features for him. Any ideas? Thanks, Sujan

    Read the article

  • Caching result of setUp() using Python unittest

    - by dbr
    I currently have a unittest.TestCase that looks like.. class test_appletrailer(unittest.TestCase): def setup(self): self.all_trailers = Trailers(res = "720", verbose = True) def test_has_trailers(self): self.failUnless(len(self.all_trailers) > 1) # ..more tests.. This works fine, but the Trailers() call takes about 2 seconds to run.. Given that setUp() is called before each test is run, the tests now take almost 10 seconds to run (with only 3 test functions) What is the correct way of caching the self.all_trailers variable between tests? Removing the setUp function, and doing.. class test_appletrailer(unittest.TestCase): all_trailers = Trailers(res = "720", verbose = True) ..works, but then it claims "Ran 3 tests in 0.000s" which is incorrect.. The only other way I could think of is to have a cache_trailers global variable (which works correctly, but is rather horrible): cache_trailers = None class test_appletrailer(unittest.TestCase): def setUp(self): global cache_trailers if cache_trailers is None: cache_trailers = self.all_trailers = all_trailers = Trailers(res = "720", verbose = True) else: self.all_trailers = cache_trailers

    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

< Previous Page | 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122  | Next Page >