Search Results

Search found 42756 results on 1711 pages for 'model based testing'.

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 40/1711 | < Previous Page | 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47  | Next Page >

  • Python Pre-testing for exceptions when coverage fails

    - by Tal Weiss
    I recently came across a simple but nasty bug. I had a list and I wanted to find the smallest member in it. I used Python's built-in min(). Everything worked great until in some strange scenario the list was empty (due to strange user input I could not have anticipated). My application crashed with a ValueError (BTW - not documented in the official docs). I have very extensive unit tests and I regularly check coverage to avoid surprises like this. I also use Pylint (everything is integrated in PyDev) and I never ignore warnings, yet I failed to catch this bug before my users did. Is there anything I can change in my methodology to avoid these kind of runtime errors? (which would have been caught at compile time in Java / C#?). I'm looking for something more than wrapping my code with a big try-except. What else can I do? How many other build in Python functions are hiding nasty surprises like this???

    Read the article

  • Django TestCase testing order

    - by ziang
    If there are several methods in the test class, I found that the order to execute is alphabetical. But I want to customize the order of execution. How to define the execution order? For example: testTestA will be loaded first than testTestB. class Test(TestCase): def setUp(self): ... def testTestB(self): #test code def testTestA(self): #test code

    Read the article

  • Integration testing - Hibernate & DbUnit

    - by Marco
    Hi, I'm writing some integrations tests in JUnit. What happens here is that when i run all the tests together in a row (and not separately), the data persisted in the database always changes and the tests find unexpected data (inserted by the previous test) during their execution. I was thinking to use DbUnit, but i wonder if it resets the auto-increment index between each execution or not (because the tests also check the IDs of the persisted entities). Thanks M.

    Read the article

  • Unit testing with Mocks when SUT is leveraging Task Parallel Libaray

    - by StevenH
    I am trying to unit test / verify that a method is being called on a dependency, by the system under test. The depenedency is IFoo. The dependent class is IBar. IBar is implemented as Bar. Bar will call Start() on IFoo in a new (System.Threading.Tasks.)Task, when Start() is called on Bar instance. Unit Test (Moq): [Test] public void StartBar_ShouldCallStartOnAllFoo_WhenFoosExist() { //ARRANGE //Create a foo, and setup expectation var mockFoo0 = new Mock<IFoo>(); mockFoo0.Setup(foo => foo.Start()); var mockFoo1 = new Mock<IFoo>(); mockFoo1.Setup(foo => foo.Start()); //Add mockobjects to a collection var foos = new List<IFoo> { mockFoo0.Object, mockFoo1.Object }; IBar sutBar = new Bar(foos); //ACT sutBar.Start(); //Should call mockFoo.Start() //ASSERT mockFoo0.VerifyAll(); mockFoo1.VerifyAll(); } Implementation of IBar as Bar: class Bar : IBar { private IEnumerable<IFoo> Foos { get; set; } public Bar(IEnumerable<IFoo> foos) { Foos = foos; } public void Start() { foreach(var foo in Foos) { Task.Factory.StartNew( () => { foo.Start(); }); } } } I appears that the issue is obviously due to the fact that the call to "foo.Start()" is taking place on another thread (/task), and the mock (Moq framework) can't detect it. But I could be wrong. Thanks

    Read the article

  • VS2008: File creation fails randomly in unit testing?

    - by Tim
    I'm working on implementing a reasonably simple XML serializer/deserializer (log file parser) application in C# .NET with VS 2008. I have about 50 unit tests right now for various parts of the code (mostly for the various serialization operations), and some of them seem to be failing mostly at random when they deal with file I/O. The way the tests are structured is that in the test setup method, I create a new empty file at a certain predetermined location, and close the stream I get back. Then I run some basic tests on the file (varying by what exactly is under test). In the cleanup method, I delete the file again. A large portion (usually 30 or more, though the number varies run to run) of my unit tests will fail at the initialize method, claiming they can't access the file I'm trying to create. I can't pin down the exact reason, since a test that will work one run fails the next; they all succeed when run individually. What's the problem here? Why can't I access this file across multiple unit tests? Relevant methods for a unit test that will fail some of the time: [TestInitialize()] public void LogFileTestInitialize() { this.testFolder = System.Environment.GetFolderPath( System.Environment.SpecialFolder.LocalApplicationData ); this.testPath = this.testFolder + "\\empty.lfp"; System.IO.File.Create(this.testPath); } [TestMethod()] public void LogFileConstructorTest() { string filePath = this.testPath; LogFile target = new LogFile(filePath); Assert.AreNotEqual(null, target); Assert.AreEqual(this.testPath, target.filePath); Assert.AreEqual("empty.lfp", target.fileName); Assert.AreEqual(this.testFolder + "\\empty.lfp.lfpdat", target.metaPath); } [TestCleanup()] public void LogFileTestCleanup() { System.IO.File.Delete(this.testPath); } And the LogFile() constructor: public LogFile(String filePath) { this.entries = new List<Entry>(); this.filePath = filePath; this.metaPath = filePath + ".lfpdat"; this.fileName = filePath.Substring(filePath.LastIndexOf("\\") + 1); } The precise error message: Initialization method LogFileParserTester.LogFileTest.LogFileTestInitialize threw exception. System.IO.IOException: System.IO.IOException: The process cannot access the file 'C:\Users\<user>\AppData\Local\empty.lfp' because it is being used by another process..

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing Hibernate's Optimistic Locking (within Spring)

    - by Michal Bachman
    I'd like to write a unit test to verify that optimistic locking is properly set up (using Spring and Hibernate). I'd like to have the test class extend Spring's AbstractTransactionalJUnit4SpringContextTests. What I want to end up with is a method like this: @Test (expected = StaleObjectStateException.class) public void testOptimisticLocking() { A a = getCurrentSession().load(A.class, 1); a.setVersion(a.getVersion()-1); getCurrentSession().saveOrUpdate(a); getCurrentSession().flush(); fail("Optimistic locking does not work"); } This test fails. What do you recommend as a best practice? The reason I am trying to do this is that I want to transfer the version to the client (using a DTO). I want to prove that when the DTO is sent back to the server and merged with a freshly loaded entity, saving that entity will fail if it's been updated by somebody else in the meantime.

    Read the article

  • Robotium Uniting Testing on an application having multiple processes

    - by warenix
    I have written an application running activities in multiple processes. I tried Robotium by creating a new test project set target package to my application. When I executed it, the test stopped with the following error message: Error in testDisplayBlackBox: java.lang.RuntimeException: Intent in process com.abc.def resolved to different process com.abc.def:mail: Intent { act=android.intent.action.MAIN flg=0x10000000 cmp=com.abc.def/com.abc.def.email.activity.Welcome } at android.app.Instrumentation.startActivitySync(Instrumentation.java:377) at android.test.InstrumentationTestCase.launchActivityWithIntent(InstrumentationTestCase.java:119) at android.test.InstrumentationTestCase.launchActivity(InstrumentationTestCase.java:97) at android.test.ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2.getActivity(ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2.java:104) at com.abc.def.test.TestApk.setUp(TestApk.java:31) at android.test.AndroidTestRunner.runTest(AndroidTestRunner.java:190) at android.test.AndroidTestRunner.runTest(AndroidTestRunner.java:175) at android.test.InstrumentationTestRunner.onStart(InstrumentationTestRunner.java:555) at android.app.Instrumentation$InstrumentationThread.run(Instrumentation.java:1584) Test results for InstrumentationTestRunner=.E Time: 0.027 FAILURES!!! Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1 Is it possible to have any workaround provided that I have source code in hand?

    Read the article

  • Testing bash scripts

    - by nimcap
    We have a system that has some bash scripts running besides Java code. Since we are trying to "Test Everything That Could Possibly Break" and those bash scripts may break, we want to test them. The problem is it is hard to test the scripts. Is there a way or a best practice to test bash scripts? Or should we quit using bash scripts and look for alternative solutions that are testable?

    Read the article

  • Testing fault tolerant code

    - by Robert
    I’m currently working on a server application were we have agreed to try and maintain a certain level of service. The level of service we want to guaranty is: if a request is accepted by the server and the server sends on an acknowledgement to the client we want to guaranty that the request will happen, even if the server crashes. As requests can be long running and the acknowledgement time needs be short we implement this by persisting the request, then sending an acknowledgement to the client, then carrying out the various actions to fulfill the request. As actions are carried out they too are persisted, so the server knows the state of a request on start up, and there’s also various reconciliation mechanisms with external systems to check the accuracy of our logs. This all seems to work fairly well, but we have difficult saying this with any conviction as we find it very difficult to test our fault tolerant code. So far we’ve come up with two strategies but neither is entirely satisfactory: Have an external process watch the server code and then try and kill it off at what the external process thinks is an appropriate point in the test Add code the application that will cause it to crash a certain know critical points My problem with the first strategy is the external process cannot know the exact state of the application, so we cannot be sure we’re hitting the most problematic points in the code. My problem with the second strategy, although it gives more control over were the fault takes, is I do not like have code to inject faults within my application, even with optional compilation etc. I fear it would be too easy to over look a fault injection point and have it slip into a production environment.

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing: DateTime.Now

    - by Pedro
    I have some unit tests that expects the 'current time' to be different than DateTime.Now and I don't want to change the computer's time, obviously. What's the best strategy to achieve this? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Can't add ADO.NET Entity Model because of error

    - by Freshblood
    I am using VS 2010 Express.This error appear "Error HRESULT E_FAIL has been returned from a call to a COM compenent" When i try to Add ADO.NET Entity Data Model. VS 2008 PRO is installed on my pc too but i don't think that it is caused by VS 2008 .I tried to reinstall VS 2010 Express but still same. How can i fix it ?

    Read the article

  • Null reference to DataContext when testing an ASP.NET MVC app with NUnit

    - by user252160
    I have an ASP.NET MVC application with a separate project added for tests. I know the plusses and minuses of using the connection to the database when running unit tests, and I still want to use it. Yet, every time when I run the tests with the NUnit tool, they all fail due to my Data Context being null. I heard something about having a separate config file for the tests assembly, but i am not sure whether I did it properly, or whether that works at all.

    Read the article

  • dummy IVR for testing vxml

    - by Nippysaurus
    Voxeo provide a free IVR for development purposes, but I was wondering if there is a much simpler form of test IVR, perhaps which runs on the local machine and uses your microphone and speakers instead of the telephony network?

    Read the article

  • Testing install procedure of a program requiring administrative privileges

    - by Lucas Meijer
    I'm trying to write automated test, to ensure that the installer for my program works okay. The program can be installed for all users (requires admin privs), or for current user (does not require admin privs). The program can also autoupdate itself, which in some cases requires admin privileges, and in some cases doesn't. I'm looking for a way where I can have an automated test click "Yes, Allow" on the UAC dialogs, so I can write tests for all different scenarios, on many different operating systems, so that I can be confident when I make changes to the installer that I didn't break anything. Obviously, the installer process itself cannot do this. However, I control the complete machine, and could easily start some sort of daemon process with administrative rights, that the testprogram could make a socket connection to, to request it to "please click ok on the UAC now".

    Read the article

  • Unit testing a controller method?

    - by Stefan Kendall
    I have a controller method like such: def search = { def query = params.query ... render results as JSON } How do I unit test this? Specifically, how do I call search to set params.query, and how do I test the results of the method render? Is there a way to mock the render method, perhaps?

    Read the article

  • Flex Unit testing of library and mxml using FlexUnit

    - by user344722
    Hi, I have some software classes(library) to run commands on any mxml file. These classes(library) are wrapped in a SWC file. This SWC file is referenced by any sample mxml application (by adding as SWC file). My problem is that I want to test these software classes(library) against my sample mxml file using FlexUnit. That is, I should test methods run by software classes on the mxml file. How can I accomplish this? Thanks, Pradeep

    Read the article

  • Testing chess game

    - by mousey
    There is a software for chess game and we need to test the following method: boolean canMoveTo(int x, int y) x and y are the coordinates of the chess board and it returns true/false whether the piece can move to that position or not. We need to test this method for a pawn piece and you can set up the board any way you like prior to running a test case. Source code is not provided

    Read the article

  • Shoulda and Paperclip testing

    - by trobrock
    I am trying to test a couple models that have an attachment with Paperclip. I have all of my validations passing except for the content-type check. # myapp/test/unit/project_test.rb should_have_attached_file :logo should_validate_attachment_presence :logo should validate_attachment_size(:logo).less_than(1.megabyte) should_validate_attachment_content_type :logo, :valid => ["image/png", "image/jpeg", "image/pjpeg", "image/x-png"] # myapp/app/models/project.rb has_attached_file :logo, :styles => { :small => "100x100>", :medium => "200x200>" } validates_attachment_presence :logo validates_attachment_size :logo, :less_than => 1.megabyte validates_attachment_content_type :logo, :content_type => ["image/png", "image/jpeg", "image/pjpeg", "image/x-png"] The errors I am getting: 1) Failure: test: Client should validate the content types allowed on attachment logo. (ClientTest) [/Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/thoughtbot-shoulda-2.10.2/lib/shoulda/assertions.rb:55:in `assert_accepts' vendor/plugins/paperclip/shoulda_macros/paperclip.rb:44:in `__bind_1276100387_499280' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/thoughtbot-shoulda-2.10.2/lib/shoulda/context.rb:351:in `call' /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/thoughtbot-shoulda-2.10.2/lib/shoulda/context.rb:351:in `test: Client should validate the content types allowed on attachment logo. ']: Content types image/png, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, image/x-png should be accepted and rejected by logo This happens on two different models that are set up the same way.

    Read the article

  • Downsides to using FakeWeb compared to writing mocks for testing

    - by ajmurmann
    I never liked writing mocks and a while ago someone here recommended to use FakeWeb. I immediately fell completely in love with FakeWeb. However, I have to wonder if there is a downside to using FakeWeb. It seems like mocks are still much more common, so I wonder what I am missing that's wrong with using FakeWeb instead. Is there a certain kind of error you can't cover with Fakeweb or is it something about the TDD or BDD process?

    Read the article

  • Testing a Non-blocking Queue

    - by jsw
    I've ported the non-blocking queue psuedocode here to C#. The code below is meant as a near verbatim copy of the paper. What approach would you take to test the implementation? Note: I'm running in VS2010 so I don't have CHESS support yet. using System.Threading; #pragma warning disable 0420 namespace ConcurrentCollections { class QueueNodePointer<T> { internal QueueNode<T> ptr; internal QueueNodePointer() : this(null) { } internal QueueNodePointer(QueueNode<T> ptr) { this.ptr = ptr; } } class QueueNode<T> { internal T value; internal QueueNodePointer<T> next; internal QueueNode() : this(default(T)) { } internal QueueNode(T value) { this.value = value; this.next = new QueueNodePointer<T>(); } } public class ConcurrentQueue<T> { private volatile int count = 0; private QueueNodePointer<T> qhead = new QueueNodePointer<T>(); private QueueNodePointer<T> qtail = new QueueNodePointer<T>(); public ConcurrentQueue() { var node = new QueueNode<T>(); node.next.ptr = null; this.qhead.ptr = this.qtail.ptr = node; } public int Count { get { return this.count; } } public void Enqueue(T value) { var node = new QueueNode<T>(value); node.next.ptr = null; QueueNodePointer<T> tail; QueueNodePointer<T> next; while (true) { tail = this.qtail; next = tail.ptr.next; if (tail == this.qtail) { if (next.ptr == null) { var newtail = new QueueNodePointer<T>(node); if (Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref tail.ptr.next, newtail, next) == next) { Interlocked.Increment(ref this.count); break; } else { Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref this.qtail, new QueueNodePointer<T>(next.ptr), tail); } } } } Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref this.qtail, new QueueNodePointer<T>(node), tail); } public T Dequeue() { T value; while (true) { var head = this.qhead; var tail = this.qtail; var next = head.ptr.next; if (head == this.qhead) { if (head.ptr == tail.ptr) { if (next.ptr == null) { return default(T); } Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref this.qtail, new QueueNodePointer<T>(next.ptr), tail); } else { value = next.ptr.value; var newhead = new QueueNodePointer<T>(next.ptr); if (Interlocked.CompareExchange(ref this.qhead, newhead, head) == head) { Interlocked.Decrement(ref this.count); break; } } } } return value; } } } #pragma warning restore 0420

    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 | 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47  | Next Page >