Search Results

Search found 37403 results on 1497 pages for 'mvc view testing'.

Page 255/1497 | < Previous Page | 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262  | Next Page >

• ISTQB terminology question (Defect)

  - by user970696

  According to ISTQB (and few more sources + wiki ), a defect/bug is the actual cause of error in software, e.g. incorrect statement, logical or semantic error. The actual definion is: a flaw in the system or component that could lead to the failure. But what about specification bugs? I cannot relate to it. Specification bugs are quite common but if the programmer implements software according to spec with a bug, it is not his fault (IMHO). But then the definion could not apply and I am sure it must have been addressed somehow. Could you help me to understand this?

  Read the article

• How is software used in critical life-or-death systems tested?

  - by waiwai933

  An airplane, as opposed to, for example, a website, is a system where any failure in certain systems is completely unacceptable, since errors in e.g. flight monitoring can cause the autopilot to malfunction and do a dive. Obviously, this doesn't happen since the brilliant engineers at Boeing and Airbus have checks in the autopilot to make sure it doesn't suddenly decide a dive is a perfectly acceptable and safe maneuver. Or perhaps the computer crashes, and the pilots in the newer fly-by-wire aircraft can no longer actually fly the plane. Of course, there are various safety procedures and redundancies built into these systems to prevent a crash (of both the software and the aircraft). However, on the other hand, it's quite obvious that software isn't perfect—both open source and closed source software do crash regularly, and only the simplest "Hello World" program doesn't fail. How can the engineers who design the software systems in the aeronautic, medical, and other life-or-death industries manage to test their software so that it doesn't fail (and if it does fail, at least fail gracefully)? I'm desperately hoping that you're not all going to go: "Oh, I work for Boeing/Airbus/(some other company) and it's not! Have fun on your next flight/hospital visit."

  Read the article

• Are unit tests really used as documentation?

  - by stijn

  I cannot count the number of times I read statements in the vein of 'unit tests are a very important source of documentation of the code under test'. I do not deny they are true. But personally I haven't found myself using them as documentation, ever. For the typical frameworks I use, the method declarations document their behaviour and that's all I need. And I assume the unit tests backup everything stated in that documentation, plus likely some more internal stuff, so on one side it duplicates the ducumentation while on the other it might add some more that is irrelevant. So the question is: when are unit tests used as documentation? When the comments do not cover everything? By developpers extending the source? And what do they expose that can be useful and relevant that the documentation itself cannot expose?

  Read the article

• Test driven development - convince me!

  - by Casebash

  I know some people are massive proponents of test driven development. I have used unit tests in the past, but only to test operations that can be tested easily or which I believe will quite possibly be correct. Complete or near complete code coverage sounds like it would take a lot of time. What projects do you use test-driven development for? Do you only use it for projects above a certain size? Should I be using it or not? Convince me!

  Read the article

• Is the difference between BDD and TDD nothing more than a vocabulary shift?

  - by Desolate Planet

  Hello, I recently made a start on learning BDD (Behaviour Driven Development) after watching a Google tech talk presented by David Astels. He made a very interesting case for using BDD and some of the literature I've read seem to highlight that it's easier to sell BDD to management. Admittedly, I'm a little skeptical about BDD after watching the above video. So, I'm interested to understand if BDD is indeed nothing more than a change in vocabulary or if it offers other benefits.

  Read the article

• What is an acceptable level of FPS in browser workslow editor?

  - by Theo Walcott

  I'm developing a diagraming tool and need some metrics to test it against. Unfortunately I couldn't find information regarding an average acceptable FPS level for this kind of web apps. We all know such levels for action games (which is 60fps minimum), 25fps for videostreaming. Can anyone give me some information reagarding minimal FPS level for drawing web apps? What tools would you recomend to test my app?

  Read the article

• NUnit SetUp and TearDown

  - by Lijo

  I have some experience in MS Test but new to NUnit. Whether NUnit [Setup] is corresponding to [ClassInitialize] or [TestInitialize] in MS Test? What is the NUnit attribute corresponding to [TestInitialize]? REFERENCE: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1873191/testinitialize-gets-fired-for-every-test-in-my-visual-studio-unit-tests http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4602288/nunit-testcontext-currentcontext-test-not-working

  Read the article

• Your experiences with TDD [closed]

  - by SkonJeet

  In your experience, does TDD prove to be a useful approach in all development projects? Do you take the approach of TDD even when working on an existing project? Also, how does mocking tie in with a TDD discipline? I'm not looking for opinions, I'm looking for developers' advice, tips and learning resources regarding TDD's usage based on their experience. I'm going to spend the day equipping myself with enough knowledge about TDD to start making small steps towards using it but I don't know to what extent I should be using it.

  Read the article

• Is having a class have a handleAction(type) method bad practice?

  - by zhenka

  My web application became a little too complicated to do everything in a controller so I had to build large wrapper classes for ORM models. The possible actions a user can trigger are all similar and after a certain point I realized that the best way to go would be to just have constructor method receive action type as a parameter to take care of the small differences internally, as opposed to either passing many arguments or doing a lot of things in the controller. Is this a good practice? I can't really give details for privacy issues.

  Read the article

• Automated tests for differencing algorithm

  - by Matthew Rodatus

  We are designing a differencing algorithm (based on Longest Common Subsequence) that compares a source text and a modified copy to extract the new content (i.e. content that is only in the modified copy). I'm currently compiling a library of test case data. We need to be able to run automated tests that verify the test cases, but we don't want to verify strict accuracy. Given the heuristic nature of our algorithm, we need our test pass/failures to be fuzzy. We want to specify a threshold of overlap between the desired result and the actual result (i.e. the content that is extracted). I have a few sketches in my mind as to how to solve this, but has anyone done this before? Does anyone have guidance or ideas about how to do this effectively?

  Read the article

• Can not update Natty running from a USB stick

  - by Ingo Gerth

  In a blogpost Jono explained a nice way to test the latest version of Natty. Under point four he proposes: Step 4: Update Although you installed the latest daily you should ensure it is up to date, and you can do this with: sudo apt-get update sudo apt-get upgrade Now, I followed all the steps and am actually writing this question from a session running on a 4GB USB stick. When trying to update the installation though (I just tried to do that using the Update Manager), it always fails because I do not have enough disc space remaining. How can I get Ubuntu to update properly on my USB stick?

  Read the article

• How can I refresh/reinstall/clear/set-to-default my bootup process?

  - by Tchalvak

  I'm currently having a problem with my bootup process that is growing progressively worse as time goes on: While booting, it does a few minutes of hard-drive reading. During that, instead of showing a boot splash screen, it shows various dashes and dots, as if the video card isn't recognizing. The splash screen actually has colors similar to the splash screen (purple), it simply is garbled. It then does a few minutes of hard-drive reads, and if I leave it long enough, sometimes it boots into the desktop (and auto-logs-in). Sometimes, unfortunately, it just hangs on that garbled screen and reads from the hard-drive forever. Notably, I've also stopped being able to access grub during bootup (perhaps it is just not displayed correctly by the video, hard to tell). This is a symptom that has grown over the course of various ubuntu upgrades, at least I suspect that the upgrade process is leaving behind cruft. So, is there a safe way for me to "refresh" the boot system so that it is clean, new, fast, and reliable? For example, to test out a cleanly configured boot, make sure that it works (try before I buy), and then apply it to the system to eliminate as much of this problem as possible? Edit: Here is the requested bootchart: http://imgur.com/9jocF

  Read the article

• How to organize a Coding Dojo?

  - by Stephan

  Over on stack overflow it was asked how to organize a coding dojo (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4338567/how-to-organize-a-coding-dojo-event). I believe that may have been the wrong forum... I wonder the same thing: how is a Codeing Dojo organized? What is the structure of a meeting? How would one pick Katas? What do you plan ahead of time? I am interested in any ideas on this as well as links to any resource that may be outlining this.

  Read the article

• Whats is the best Windows VPS hosting? [closed]

  - by Donny V.

  Possible Duplicate: How to find web hosting that meets my requirements? I'm currently using shared hosting. I want more control over my IIS and also I need to run in full trust. There are a lot of options out there for Windows VPS hosting. Which ones do you recommend is the best? Some must haves Has to have great support Automatic hardware fail overs Access through Remote Desktop (you would be amazed some don't offer this) No limit on what I can install on it

  Read the article

• What to do when TDD tests reveal new functionality that is needed that also needs tests?

  - by Joshua Harris

  What do you do when you are writing a test and you get to the point where you need to make the test pass and you realize that you need an additional piece of functionality that should be separated into its own function? That new function needs to be tested as well, but the TDD cycle says to Make a test fail, make it pass then refactor. If I am on the step where I am trying to make my test pass I'm not supposed to go off and start another failing test to test the new functionality that I need to implement. For example, I am writing a point class that has a function WillCollideWith(LineSegment): public class Point { // Point data and constructor ... public bool CollidesWithLine(LineSegment lineSegment) { Vector PointEndOfMovement = new Vector(Position.X + Velocity.X, Position.Y + Velocity.Y); LineSegment pointPath = new LineSegment(Position, PointEndOfMovement); if (lineSegment.Intersects(pointPath)) return true; return false; } } I was writing a test for CollidesWithLine when I realized that I would need a LineSegment.Intersects(LineSegment) function. But, should I just stop what I am doing on my test cycle to go create this new functionality? That seems to break the "Red, Green, Refactor" principle. Should I just write the code that detects that lineSegments Intersect inside of the CollidesWithLine function and refactor it after it is working? That would work in this case since I can access the data from LineSegment, but what about in cases where that kind of data is private?

  Read the article

• Is deserializing complex objects instead of creating them a good idea, in test setup?

  - by Chris Bye

  I'm writing tests for a component that takes very complex objects as input. These tests are mixes of tests against already existing components, and test-first tests for new features. Instead of re-creating my input objects (this would be a large chunk of code) or reading one from our data store, I had the thought to serialize a live instance of one of these objects, and just deserialize it into test setup. I can't decide if this is a reasonable idea that will save effort in long run, or whether it's the worst idea that I've ever had, causing those that will maintain this code will hunt me down as soon as they read it. Is deserialization of inputs a valid means of test setup in some cases? To give a sense of scale of what I'm dealing with, the size of serialization output for one of these input objects is 93KB. Obtained by, in C#: new BinaryFormatter().Serialize((Stream)fileStream, myObject);

  Read the article

• How to build a highload multithreaded web application in MVC3 or MVC4?

  - by IamStalker

  I need to build a highload multithreaded web application in ASP.NET MVC3 or MVC4, My question is how to design an architecture of an application? How to choose a DomainModel , use or not to use an ORM in this application? How to build a system that would be safe and if some error will happen, how to raise up a second level safety mechanism? Any examples with sources would be greatly appreciated. PS: don't kill the question if it's should be in any other SO places. Just tell me and i will place it there. Thank you very much in advance.

  Read the article

• Should tests be in the same Ruby file or in separated Ruby files?

  - by Junior Mayhé

  While using Selenium and Ruby to do some functional tests, I am worried with the performance. So is it better to add all test methods in the same Ruby file, or I should put each one in separated code files? Below a sample with all tests in the same file: # encoding: utf-8 require "selenium-webdriver" require "test/unit" class Tests < Test::Unit::TestCase def setup @driver = Selenium::WebDriver.for :firefox @base_url = "http://mysite" @driver.manage.timeouts.implicit_wait = 30 @verification_errors = [] @wait = Selenium::WebDriver::Wait.new :timeout => 10 end def teardown @driver.quit assert_equal [], @verification_errors end def element_present?(how, what) @driver.find_element(how, what) true rescue Selenium::WebDriver::Error::NoSuchElementError false end def verify(&blk) yield rescue Test::Unit::AssertionFailedError => ex @verification_errors << ex end def test_1 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_2 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_3 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_4 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end def test_5 @driver.get(@base_url + "/") # a huge test here end end

  Read the article

• Silverlight web site for innovation business incubator of Chelyabinsk

  - by brainbox

   Today we released Silverlight powered web site for innovation business incubator of Chelyabinsk. I hope you find it interesting!

  Read the article

• Where should I store and verify files manipulated by an app

  - by Alan W. Smith

  I'm working on a little Ruby script to move screenshots while renaming them based on a specific convention. I'll be writing tests to confirm the behavior. Ruby has lots of conventions for where to store files (e.g. the "spec" and "features" directories for RSpec and Cucumber, respectively), but I'm not finding best practices for storing files that will be acted upon by the tests. The same goes for a destination for the final copies of the files. So, the question in two parts is: Where should I store files that the test cases will use for a source input. Where should tests that need to write output files send them to.

  Read the article

• What is the value to checking in broken unit tests?

  - by Adam W.

  While there are ways of keeping unit tests from being executed, what is the value of checking in broken unit tests? I will use a simple example. Case sensitivity. The current code is Case Sensitive. A valid input into the method is "Cat" and it would return an enum of Animal.Cat. However, the desired functionality of the method should not be case sensitive. So if the method described was passed "cat" it could possibly return something like Animal.Null instead of Animal.Cat and the unit test would fail. Though a simple code change would make this work, a more complex issue may take weeks to fix, but identifying the bug with a unit test could be a less complex task. The application currently being analyzed has 4 years of code that "works". However, recent discussions regarding unit tests has found flaws in the code. Some just need explicit implementation documentation (ex. case sensitive or not), or code that does not execute the bug based on how it is currently called. But unit tests can be created executing specific scenarios that will cause the bug to be seen and are valid inputs. What is the value of checking in unit tests that exercise the bug until someone can get around to fixing the code? Should this unit test be flagged with ignore, priority, category etc, to determine whether a build was successful based on tests executed? Eventually the unit test should be created to execute the code once someone fixes it. On one hand it shows that identified bugs have not been fixed. On the other, there could be hundreds of failed unit tests showing up in the logs and weeding through the ones that should fail vs. failures due to a code check-in would be difficult to find.

  Read the article

• Webservice Return Generic Result Type or Purposed Result Type

  - by hanzolo

  I'm building a webservice which returns JSON / XML / SOAP at the moment.. and I'm not entirely sure which approach for returning results is best. Which would be a better return value? A generic "transfer" type structure, which carries Generic properties or a purposed type with distinct properties: class GenericTransferObject{ public string returnVal; public string returnType; } VS class PurposedTransferObject_1{ public string Property1; } //and then building additional "types" for additional values class PurposedTransferObject_2 { public string PropertyA; public string PropertyB; } Now, this would be the serialized and returned from a web service call via some client technology, JQuery in this example. SO if I called: /GetDaysInWeek/ I would either get back: {"returnType": "DaysInWeek", "returnVal": "365" } OR {"DaysInWeek": "365"} And then it would go from there. On the one hand there's flexibilty with the 1st example. I can add "returnTypes" without needing to adjust the client other than referencing an additional "index".. but if I had to add a property, now i'm changing a structure definition.. Is there an obvious choice in this situation?

  Read the article

• What have you learned from the bugs you helped discover and fix?

  - by Ethel Evans

  I liked the core of this question, and wanted to re-ask it in a way that made it less about 'fun' and more about 'What do these past mistakes tell us about how we can write and test software better?' As an SDET, I'm always looking for anecdotes about new and interesting ways that programs can fail. I've learned a lot from these tales in the past, and would like to get that from the intelligent people in this community as well. I'd be interested in hearing what the issue was, how it was caught, if you think there was anything that could have reasonably done to catch it earlier or to avoid the same issue on later projects, and any other interesting lessons you took away from this bug. Please only write about bugs you personally were involved with, ideally on a project you worked on (e.g., no "10 years before I was born, this happened and it was FUNNY!" answers). Please vote up answers that are thought-provoking or could change how you develop or test in some way, so this isn't just 'social fun'. Try to avoid voting up something just because it was funny.

  Read the article

• How do functional languages handle a mocking situation when using Interface based design?

  - by Programmin Tool

  Typically in C# I use dependency injection to help with mocking; public void UserService { public UserService(IUserQuery userQuery, IUserCommunicator userCommunicator, IUserValidator userValidator) { UserQuery = userQuery; UserValidator = userValidator; UserCommunicator = userCommunicator; } ... public UserResponseModel UpdateAUserName(int userId, string userName) { var result = UserValidator.ValidateUserName(userName) if(result.Success) { var user = UserQuery.GetUserById(userId); if(user == null) { throw new ArgumentException(); user.UserName = userName; UserCommunicator.UpdateUser(user); } } ... } ... } public class WhenGettingAUser { public void AndTheUserDoesNotExistThrowAnException() { var userQuery = Substitute.For<IUserQuery>(); userQuery.GetUserById(Arg.Any<int>).Returns(null); var userService = new UserService(userQuery); AssertionExtensions.ShouldThrow<ArgumentException>(() => userService.GetUserById(-121)); } } Now in something like F#: if I don't go down the hybrid path, how would I test workflow situations like above that normally would touch the persistence layer without using Interfaces/Mocks? I realize that every step above would be tested on its own and would be kept as atomic as possible. Problem is that at some point they all have to be called in line, and I'll want to make sure everything is called correctly.

  Read the article

• filtering dates in a data view webpart when using webservices datasource

  - by Patrick Olurotimi Ige

  I was working on a data view web part recently and i had  to filter the data based on dates.Since the data source was web services i couldn't use  the Offset which i blogged about earlier.When using web services to pull data in sharepoint designer you would have to use xpath.So for example this is the soap that populates the rows<xsl:variable name="Rows" select="/soap:Envelope/soap:Body/ddw1:GetListItemsResponse/ddw1:GetListItemsResult/ddw1:listitems/rs:data/z:row/>But you would need to add some predicate [] and filter the date nodes.So you can do something like this (marked in red)<xsl:variable name="Rows" select="/soap:Envelope/soap:Body/ddw1:GetListItemsResponse/ddw1:GetListItemsResult/ddw1:listitems/rs:data/z:row[ddwrt:FormatDateTime(string(@ows_Created),1033,'yyyyMMdd') &gt;= ddwrt:FormatDateTime(string(substring-after($fd,'#')),1033,'yyyyMMdd')]"/>For the filtering to work you need to have the date formatted  above as yyyyMMdd.One more thing you must have noticed is the $fd variable.This variable is created by me creating a calculated column in the list so something like this [Created]-2So basically that the xpath is doing is get me data only when the Created date  is greater than or equal to the Created date -2 which is 2 date less than the created date.Also not that when using web services in sharepoint designer and try to use the default filtering you won't get to see greater tha or less than in the option list comparison.:(Hope this helps.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262  | Next Page >