Search Results

Search found 53818 results on 2153 pages for 'system testing'.

Page 237/2153 | < Previous Page | 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244  | Next Page >

  • Unit test helper methods?

    - by Aly
    Hi, I have classes which prviously had massive methods so i subdivided the work of this method into 'helper' methods. These helper methods are declared private to enforce encapsulation - however I want to unit test the big public methods, is it good to unit test the helper methods too as if one of them fail the public method that calls it will also fail - but this way we can identify why it failed. Also in order to test these using a mock object I would need to change their visibility from private to protected, is this desirable?

    Read the article

  • Detecting use after free() on windows.

    - by The Rook
    I'm trying to detect "Use after free()" bugs, otherwise known as "Dangling pointers". I know Valgrind can be used to detect "Use after free" bugs on the *nix platform, but what about windows? What if I don't have the source? Is there a better program than Valgrind for detecting all dangling pointers in a program? A free and open source would be preferred , but I'll use a commercial solution if it will get the job done.

    Read the article

  • Automatic profiling visual studio 2008

    - by phil
    Is there a way to do automatic profiling in visual studio 2008? I know how the profiling works both from the command line and using the GUI in VS08. What I want to accomplish: After my nightly build I want to complete some profiling (instrumental) to see if some functions (will most likely always be the same) have changed in some negative way (or positive of course).

    Read the article

  • Add Attribute (System.Attribute variety) to .aspx page - not the code-behind

    - by Macho Matt
    I am creating a custom Attribute (extending System.Attribute). I know I can put it on another class easily enough by doing the following. [MattsAttribute] public class SomeClassWhichIsACodeBehind { However, I need to be able to test this attribute easily, and putting it in the code-behind would cause a lot of extra effort to get it deployed to an environment which would respond to the behavior of attribute. What I would like to do: declaratively apply this attribute to the .aspx page itself (which is really just another class that inherits from the code-behind). Is this possible? If so, what is the proper syntax for doing this?

    Read the article

  • pass custom environment variables to System.Diagnostics.Process

    - by Mike Ruhlin
    I'm working on an app that invokes external processes like so: ProcessStartInfo startInfo = new ProcessStartInfo(PathToExecutable, Arguments){ ErrorDialog = false, RedirectStandardError = true, RedirectStandardOutput = true, UseShellExecute = false, CreateNoWindow = true, WorkingDirectory = WorkingDirectory }; using (Process process = new Process()) { process.StartInfo = startInfo; process.Start(); process.BeginErrorReadLine(); process.BeginOutputReadLine(); process.WaitForExit(); return process.ExitCode; } One of the processes I'm calling depends on an environment variable that I'd rather not require my users to set. Is there any way to modify the environment variables that get sent to the external process? Ideally I'd be able to make them visible only to the process that's running, but if I have to programmatically set them system-wide, I'll settle for that (but, would UAC force me to run as administrator to do that?) ProcessStartInfo.EnvironmentVariables is read only, so a lot of help that is...

    Read the article

  • What block is not being tested in my test method? (VS08 Test Framework)

    - by daft
    I have the following code: private void SetControlNumbers() { string controlString = ""; int numberLength = PersonNummer.Length; switch (numberLength) { case (10) : controlString = PersonNummer.Substring(6, 4); break; case (11) : controlString = PersonNummer.Substring(7, 4); break; case (12) : controlString = PersonNummer.Substring(8, 4); break; case (13) : controlString = PersonNummer.Substring(9, 4); break; } ControlNumbers = Convert.ToInt32(controlString); } Which is tested using the following test methods: [TestMethod()] public void SetControlNumbers_Length10() { string pNummer = "9999999999"; Personnummer target = new Personnummer(pNummer); Assert.AreEqual(9999, target.ControlNumbers); } [TestMethod()] public void SetControlNumbers_Length11() { string pNummer = "999999-9999"; Personnummer target = new Personnummer(pNummer); Assert.AreEqual(9999, target.ControlNumbers); } [TestMethod()] public void SetControlNumbers_Length12() { string pNummer = "199999999999"; Personnummer target = new Personnummer(pNummer); Assert.AreEqual(9999, target.ControlNumbers); } [TestMethod()] public void SetControlNumbers_Length13() { string pNummer = "1999999-9999"; Personnummer target = new Personnummer(pNummer); Assert.AreEqual(9999, target.ControlNumbers); } For some reason Visual Studio says that I have 1 block that is not tested despite showing all code in the method under test in blue (ie. the code is covered in my unit tests). Is this because of the fact that I don't have a default value defined in the switch? When the SetControlNumbers() method is called, the string on which it operates have already been validated and checked to see that it conforms to the specification and that the various Substring calls in the switch will generate a string containing 4 chars. I'm just curious as to why it says there is 1 untested block. I'm no unit test guru at all, so I'd love some feedback on this. Also, how can I improve on the conversion after the switch to make it safer other than adding a try-catch block and check for FormatExceptions and OverflowExceptions?

    Read the article

  • Why There is a difference between assembly languages like Windows, Linux ?

    - by mcaaltuntas
    I am relatively new to all this low level stuff,assembly language.. and want to learn more detail. Why there is a difference between Linux, Windows Assembly languages? As I understand when I compile a C code Operating system does not really produce pure machine or assembly code, it produces OS dependent binary code.But why ? For example when I use a x86 system, CPU only understands x86 ASM am I right?.So Why we dont write pure x86 assembly code and why there are different assembly variations based on Operating system? If we would write pure ASM or OS produce pure ASM there wouldn't be binary compatilibty issues between Operating systems or Not ? I am really wondering all reasons behind them. Any detailed answer, article, book would be great. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to build a test suite in watir?

    - by karlthorwald
    I have some single watir.rb scripts that use IE and are written in a standard watir way. How do I create a test suite that combines them? Is it possible to enumerate the files that should be included in the test suite? Is it possible to auto include single test files into a test suite by subidr? Can I cascade (include other watir suites in watir suites)?

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to extract the message from a JavaScript dialog in Chrome?

    - by Samuel
    I’ve been working on an extension for automating tests in Chrome, and I came across an obscure issue with JavaScript dialogs. The message shown in the dialog can’t be readily retrieved/copied. I’ve used the GetWindowText and InternalGetWindowText functions, but they only return the title of the dialog and the text from the buttons, not the actual message itself. I even looked at programs that extract text from forms, but no luck. So does anyone know of a way to retrieve the text from these JavaScript dialogs in Chrome?

    Read the article

  • Test-driven Development: Writing tests for private / protected variables

    - by Chetan
    I'm learning TDD, and I have a question about private / protected variables. My question is: If a function I want to test is operating on a private variable, how should I test it? Here is the example I'm working with: I have a class called Table that contains an instance variable called internalRepresentation that is a 2D array. I want to create a function called multiplyValuesByN that multiplies all the values in the 2D array by the argument n. So I write the test for it (in Python): def test_multiplyValuesByN (self): t = Table(3, 3) # 3x3 table, filled with 0's t.set(0, 0, 4) # Set value at position (0,0) to 4 t.multiplyValuesByN(3) assertEqual(t.internalRepresentation, [[12, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0], [0, 0, 0]]) Now, if I make internalRepresentation private or protected, this test will not work. How am I supposed to write the test so it doesn't depend on internalRepresentation but still tests that it looks correct after calling multiplyValuesByN?

    Read the article

  • how to access objects in run-time in qtp?

    - by Onnesh
    We have a function which accesses two types of controls like button and list box in standard windows app. The function uses only the control name as arguments, so there is no way qtp could understand what type of control it is. how to resolve this? Write 2 separate functions- 1 for button & another for list box?

    Read the article

  • How to mock static member variables

    - by pkrish
    I have a class ClassToTest which has a dependency on ClassToMock. public class ClassToMock { private static final String MEMBER_1 = FileReader.readMemeber1(); protected void someMethod() { ... } } The unit test case for ClassToTest. public class ClassToTestTest { private ClassToMock _mock; @Before public void setUp() throws Exception { _mock = mock(ClassToMock.class) } } When mock is called in the setUp() method, FileReader.readMemeber1(); is executed. Is there a way to avoid this? I think one way is to initialize the MEMBER_1 inside a method. Any other alternatives? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Rails test across multiple environments

    - by DSimon
    Is there some way to change Rails environments mid-way through a test? Or, alternately, what would be the right way to set up a test suite that can start up Rails in one environment, run the first half of my test in it, then restart Rails in another environment to finish the test? The two environments have separate databases. Some necessary context: I'm writing a Rails plugin that allows multiple installations of a Rails app to communicate with each other with user assistance, so that a user without Internet access can still use the app. They'll run a local version of an app, and upload their work to the online app by saving a file to a thumbdrive and taking it to an Internet cafe. The plugin adds two special environments to Rails: "offline-production" and "offline-test". I want to write functional tests that involve both the "test" and "offline-test" environments, to represent the main online version of the app and the local offline version of the app respectively.

    Read the article

  • Boost.Test: Looking for a working non-Trivial Test Suite Example / Tutorial

    - by Robert S. Barnes
    The Boost.Test documentation and examples don't really seem to contain any non-trivial examples and so far the two tutorials I've found here and here while helpful are both fairly basic. I would like to have a master test suite for the entire project, while maintaining per module suites of unit tests and fixtures that can be run independently. I'll also be using a mock server to test various networking edge cases. I'm on Ubuntu 8.04, but I'll take any example Linux or Windows since I'm writing my own makefiles anyways.

    Read the article

  • Visual Studio 2010 and Test Driven Development

    - by devoured elysium
    I'm making my first steps in Test Driven Development with Visual Studio. I have some questions regarding how to implement generic classes with VS 2010. First, let's say I want to implement my own version of an ArrayList. I start by creating the following test (I'm using in this case MSTest): [TestMethod] public void Add_10_Items_Remove_10_Items_Check_Size_Is_Zero() { var myArrayList = new MyArrayList<int>(); for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i) { myArrayList.Add(i); } for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i) { myArrayList.RemoveAt(0); } int expected = 0; int actual = myArrayList.Size; Assert.AreEqual(expected, actual); } I'm using VS 2010 ability to hit ctrl + . and have it implement classes/methods on the go. I have been getting some trouble when implementing generic classes. For example, when I define an .Add(10) method, VS doesn't know if I intend a generic method(as the class is generic) or an Add(int number) method. Is there any way to differentiate this? The same can happen with return types. Let's assume I'm implementing a MyStack stack and I want to test if after I push and element and pop it, the stack is still empty. We all know pop should return something, but usually, the code of this test shouldn't care for it. Visual Studio would then think that pop is a void method, which in fact is not what one would want. How to deal with this? For each method, should I start by making tests that are "very specific" such as is obvious the method should return something so I don't get this kind of ambiguity? Even if not using the result, should I have something like int popValue = myStack.Pop() ? How should I do tests to generic classes? Only test with one generic kind of type? I have been using ints, as they are easy to use, but should I also test with different kinds of objects? How do you usually approach this? I see there is a popular tool called TestDriven for .NET. With VS 2010 release, is it still useful, or a lot of its features are now part of VS 2010, rendering it kinda useless? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to know if your Unit Test is "right-sized"?

    - by leeand00
    One thing that I've always noticed with my unit tests is that they get to be kind of verbose; seeing as they could also be not verbose enough, how do you get a sense of when your unit tests are the right size? I know of a good quote for this and it's: "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to remove." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery.

    Read the article

  • Attribute to skip over statement in unit test c#

    - by Eli Perpinyal
    I am looking to skip a certain statement in my unit tests eg: if (MessageBox.Show("Are you sure you want to remove " + contact.CompanyName + " from the contacts?", "Confirm Delete", MessageBoxButton.YesNo, MessageBoxImage.Question, MessageBoxResult.Yes) == MessageBoxResult.Yes) is there an attribute i can place above the statement to avoid the unit test executing it?

    Read the article

  • Rails + simple role system through associative table

    - by user202411
    So I have the Ninja model which has many Hovercrafts through ninja_hovercrafts (which stores the ninja_id and the hovercraft_id). It is of my understanding that this kind of arrangement should be set in a way that the associative table stores only enough information to bind two different classes. But I'd like to use the associative table to work as a very streamlined authorization hub on my application. So i'd also like this table to inform my system if this binding makes the ninja the pilot or co-pilot of a given hovercraft, through a "role" field in the table. My questions are: Is this ugly? Is this normal? Are there methods built into rails that would help me to automagically create Ninjas and Hovercrafts associations WITH the role? For exemple, could I have a nested form to create both ninjas and hcs in a way that the role field in ninjas_hovercrafts would be also filled? If managing my application roles this way isn't a good idea, whats the non-resource heavy alternative (my app is being designed trying to avoid scalability problems such as excessive joins, includes, etc) thank you

    Read the article

  • Is there a Java unit-test framework that auto-tests getters and setters?

    - by Michael Easter
    There is a well-known debate in Java (and other communities, I'm sure) whether or not trivial getter/setter methods should be tested. Usually, this is with respect to code coverage. Let's agree that this is an open debate, and not try to answer it here. There have been several blog posts on using Java reflection to auto-test such methods. Does any framework (e.g. jUnit) provide such a feature? e.g. An annotation that says "this test T should auto-test all the getters/setters on class C, because I assert that they are standard". It seems to me that it would add value, and if it were configurable, the 'debate' would be left as an option to the user.

    Read the article

  • Why does this Assert fail?

    - by Peter Goras
    IEnumerable<ReportReceipt> expected = new List<ReportReceipt>() { new ReportReceipt("fileName1","Hash1","some comments1") }; IEnumerable<ReportReceipt> actual = new List<ReportReceipt>() { new ReportReceipt("fileName1","Hash1","some comments1") }; Assert.IsTrue(expected.SequenceEqual(actual)); I'm running MSTest with VS 2008.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244  | Next Page >