Search Results

Search found 7802 results on 313 pages for 'unit tests'.

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 41/313 | < Previous Page | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >

  • When reversing a Google Analytics e-commerce transaction is the per-unit price positive or negative?

    - by Michael Glenn
    Google's own instructions for reversing an e-commerce transaction seem to contradict themselves regarding the unit price. In the instructions it states The item field has a positive per-unit price and a negative quantity. yet, the code sample has a negative per-unit price and negative quantity. _gaq.push(['_addItem', '1234', // order ID - necessary to associate item with transaction 'DD44', // SKU/code - required 'T-Shirt', // product name 'Olive Medium', // category or variation '-11.99', // unit price - required '-1' // quantity - required ]); Which is correct?

    Read the article

  • Request bursting from web application Load Tests

    - by MaseBase
    I'm migrating our web and database hosting to a new environment on all new machines. I've recently performed a Load Test using WAPT to generate load from multiple distributed clients. The server has plenty of room to handle the traffic load, but I'm seeing an odd pattern of incoming traffic during the load tests. Here is the gist of our setup: Firewall server running MS Forefront TMG 2010 on Win 2k8 server Request routing done by IIS Application Request Routing on firewall machine Web server is a Hyper-V VM on the Database server (which is the host OS) These machines are hefty with dual-CPU's with six cores (12 total procs) Web server running IIS 7.5 Web applications built in ASP.NET 2.0, with 1 ISAPI filter (Url Rewrite) in front What I'm seeing during the load tests is that the requests all come through in bursts. Even though I have 7 different distributed clients sending traffic loads, the requests come through about 300-500 requests at a time. The performance monitor shows nearly all of the counters moving through this pattern, where a burst of requests comes in the req/sec jumps to 70, the queued requests jumps to 500, the current requests jumps up, the CPU jumps up, everything. Then once it's handled that group of requests, it has a lull for nearly 10 seconds where nearly nothing is happening. 0-5 req/sec, 0 queued requests, minimal CPU usage. Then after 10 seconds of inactivity, another burst comes through, spiking all of the counters once again. What I can't figure out is why the requests are coming through in bursts when I know that the load being generated is not sent that way, especially considering the various load-generating clients sending traffic all in different intervals with random think time's between each request. Is there something in the layers between Hyper-V or perhaps in the hardware which might cause this coalesce of requests together? Here is what i'm looking at, the highlighted metric is Requests/sec, but the others critical counter go with it: Requests Queued (which I'd obviously like to keep as close to 0 as possible). Any ideas on this?

    Read the article

  • Do you know the minimum builds to create on any branch?

    - by Martin Hinshelwood
    You should always have three builds on your team project. These should be setup and tested using an empty solution before you write any code at all. Figure: Three builds named in the format [TeamProject].[AreaPath]_[Branch].[Gate|CI|Nightly] for every branch.   These builds should use the same XAML build workflow; however you may set them up to run a different set of tests depending on the time it takes to run a full build. Gate – Only needs to run the smallest set of tests, but should run most if not all of the Unit Test. This is run before developers are allowed to check-in CI – This should run all Unit Tests and all of the automated UI tests. It is run after a developer check-in. Nightly – The Nightly build should run all of the Unit Tests, all of the Automated UI tests and all of the Load and Performance tests. The nightly build is time consuming and will run but once a night. Packaging of your Product for testing the next day may be done at this stage as well. Figure: You can control what tests are run and what data is collected while they are running. Note: We do not run all the tests every time because of the time consuming nature of running some tests, but ALL tests should be run overnight. Note: If you had a really large project with thousands of tests including long running Load tests you may need to add a Weekly build to the mix.     Figure: Bad example, you can’t tell what these builds do if they are in a larger list   Figure: Good example, you know exactly what project, branch and type of build these are for.   Technorati Tags: SSW,SSW Rules,VS2010,VS ALM,Team Build 2010,Team Build

    Read the article

  • PerlRegEx vs RegularExpressionsCore Delphi Units

    - by Jan Goyvaerts
    The RegularExpressionsCore unit that is part of Delphi XE is based on the latest class-based PerlRegEx unit that I developed. Embarcadero only made a few changes to the unit. These changes are insignificant enough that code written for earlier versions of Delphi using the class-based PerlRegEx unit will work just the same with Delphi XE. The unit was renamed from PerlRegEx to RegularExpressionsCore. When migrating your code to Delphi XE, you can choose whether you want to use the new RegularExpressionsCore unit or continue using the PerlRegEx unit in your application. All you need to change is which unit you add to the uses clause in your own units. Indentation and line breaks in the code were changed to match the style used in the Delphi RTL and VCL code. This does not change the code, but makes it harder to diff the two units. Literal strings in the unit were separated into their own unit called RegularExpressionsConsts. These strings are only used for error messages that indicate bugs in your code. If your code uses TPerlRegEx correctly then the user should not see any of these strings. My code uses assertions to check for out of bounds parameters, while Embarcadero uses exceptions. Again, if you use TPerlRegEx correctly, you should never get any assertions or exceptions. The Compile method raises an exception if the regular expression is invalid in both my original TPerlRegEx component and Embarcadero’s version. If your code allows the user to provide the regular expression, you should explicitly call Compile and catch any exceptions it raises so you can tell the user there is a problem with the regular expression. Even with user-provided regular expressions, you shouldn’t get any other assertions or exceptions if your code is correct. Note that Embarcadero owns all the rights to their RegularExpressionsCore unit. Like all the other RTL and VCL units, this unit cannot be distributed by myself or anyone other than Embarcadero. I do retain the rights to my original PerlRegEx unit which I will continue to make available for those using older versions of Delphi.

    Read the article

  • PHP unable to start if "apc.shm_size" has "M" or "G" unit

    - by apasajja
    Using: Ubuntu 10.04, PHP 5.3.10, apc 3.1.3 PHP and APC installed using below repo: deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/brianmercer/php5/ubuntu lucid main deb-src http://ppa.launchpad.net/brianmercer/php5/ubuntu lucid main If I put apc.shm_size=3G or apc.shm_size=3000M in /etc/php5/fpm/conf.d/apc.ini, PHP unable to start. However, if I put only number without M or G unit, it will start and run. By default, if put only number, what unit is it means? It I put 3000 does it means 3000 MB?

    Read the article

  • Ant + JUnit = ClassNotFoundExceptions when running tests?

    - by rfkrocktk
    I'm trying to run some tests in Ant presently using JUnit, and all of my tests are failing with the following stacktrace: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: com.mypackage.MyTestCase It doesn't make too much sense to me. I'm first compiling my test cases using <javac>, then directly running the <junit> task to run the tests. My buildfile looks like this: <target name="compile.webapp.tests"> <javac srcdir="${test.java.src.dir}" destdir="${test.java.bin.dir}"> <classpath> <filelist> <file name="${red5.home}/red5.jar"/> <file name="${red5.home}/boot.jar"/> <file name="${bin.dir}/${ant.project.name}.jar"/> </filelist> <fileset dir="${red5.lib.dir}" includes="**/*"/> <fileset dir="${main.java.lib.dir}" includes="**/*"/> <fileset dir="${test.java.lib.dir}" includes="**/*"/> </classpath> </javac> </target> <target name="run.webapp.tests"> <junit printsummary="true"> <classpath> <filelist> <file name="${red5.home}/red5.jar"/> <file name="${red5.home}/boot.jar"/> <file name="${bin.dir}/${ant.project.name}.jar"/> </filelist> <fileset dir="${red5.lib.dir}" includes="**/*.jar"/> <fileset dir="${main.java.lib.dir}" includes="**/*.jar"/> <fileset dir="${test.java.lib.dir}" includes="**/*.jar"/> </classpath> <formatter type="xml"/> <batchtest todir="${test.java.output.dir}"> <fileset dir="${test.java.bin.dir}" includes="**/*TestCase*"/> </batchtest> </junit> </target> This is really weird, I can't seem to fix this. Is there something I'm doing wrong here?

    Read the article

  • What are the disadvantages of automated testing?

    - by jkohlhepp
    There are a number of questions on this site that give plenty of information about the benefits that can be gained from automated testing. But I didn't see anything that represented the other side of the coin: what are the disadvantages? Everything in life is a tradeoff and there are no silver bullets, so surely there must be some valid reasons not to do automated testing. What are they? Here's a few that I've come up with: Requires more initial developer time for a given feature Requires a higher skill level of team members Increase tooling needs (test runners, frameworks, etc.) Complex analysis required when a failed test in encountered - is this test obsolete due to my change or is it telling me I made a mistake? Edit I should say that I am a huge proponent of automated testing, and I'm not looking to be convinced to do it. I'm looking to understand what the disadvantages are so when I go to my company to make a case for it I don't look like I'm throwing around the next imaginary silver bullet. Also, I'm explicity not looking for someone to dispute my examples above. I am taking as true that there must be some disadvantages (everything has trade-offs) and I want to understand what those are.

    Read the article

  • What would a start-to-finish development procedure would look like?

    - by Tom Busby
    I have a problem that my developer friends share. We recently left university and find ourselves either end up working for a firm which already has good procedures (TDD, automated testing, proper agile development, etc) or working for a firm which doesn't. I want to learn some of these vital skills and get a grip on what a complete start-to-finish development procedure would look like. What differences would be between a smaller project, and a long term project with many team members.

    Read the article

  • Returning a mock object from a mock object

    - by Songo
    I'm trying to return an object when mocking a parser class. This is the test code using PHPUnit 3.7 //set up the result object that I want to be returned from the call to parse method $parserResult= new ParserResult(); $parserResult->setSegment('some string'); //set up the stub Parser object $stubParser=$this->getMock('Parser'); $stubParser->expects($this->any()) ->method('parse') ->will($this->returnValue($parserResult)); //injecting the stub to my client class $fileHeaderParser= new FileWriter($stubParser); $output=$fileParser->writeStringToFile(); Inside my writeStringToFile() method I'm using $parserResult like this: writeStringToFile(){ //Some code... $parserResult=$parser->parse(); $segment=$parserResult->getSegment();//that's why I set the segment in the test. } Should I mock ParserResult in the first place, so that the mock returns a mock? Is it good design for mocks to return mocks? Is there a better approach to do this all?!

    Read the article

  • Policy Implementation is Damaging Organizations: Economist Intelligence Unit

    - by michael.seback
    Read new research revealing the hidden risks of inefficient policy implementation The frenetic pace of regulatory and legislative change means public and private sector organizations must continuously update internal policies - in particular, as associated with decision making and disbursements. Yet with policy management efforts alarmingly under-resourced and under-funded, the risk and cost of non-compliance - and their associated implications - are growing daily. To find out how inefficient policy management could be putting your business at risk, read your complimentary copy of the full EIU paper - Enabling Efficient Policy Implementation - today.

    Read the article

  • White box testing with Google Test

    - by Daemin
    I've been trying out using GoogleTest for my C++ hobby project, and I need to test the internals of a component (hence white box testing). At my previous work we just made the test classes friends of the class being tested. But with Google Test that doesn't work as each test is given its own unique class, derived from the fixture class if specified, and friend-ness doesn't transfer to derived classes. Initially I created a test proxy class that is friends with the tested class. It contains a pointer to an instance of the tested class and provides methods for the required, but hidden, members. This worked for a simple class, but now I'm up to testing a tree class with an internal private node class, of which I need to access and mess with. I'm just wondering if anyone using the GoogleTest library has done any white box testing and if they have any hints or helpful constructs that would make this easier. Ok, I've found the FRIEND_TEST macro defined in the documentation, as well as some hints on how to test private code in the advanced guide. But apart from having a huge amount of friend declerations (i.e. one FRIEND_TEST for each test), is there an easier idion to use, or should I abandon using GoogleTest and move to a different test framework?

    Read the article

  • How do I make code bound to an ORM testable?

    - by RPK
    In Test Driven Development, how do I make code bound to an ORM testable? I am using a Micro-ORM (PetaPoco) and I have several methods that interact with the database like: AddCustomer UpdateRecord etc. I want to know how to write a test for these methods. I searched YouTube for videos on writing a test for DAL, but I didn't find any. I want to know which method or class is testable and how to write a test before writing the code itself.

    Read the article

  • Generating Report for NUnit

    - by thangchung
     All source codes for this post can be found at my github.Time ago, I received a request that people ask me how they can generate reports of the results of testing using NUnit? In fact, I may never do this. In the little world of my programming, I only care about the test results, red-green-refactoring, and that was it. When I got that question quite a bit unexpected, I knew that I could use NCover to generate reports, but reports of NCover too simple, it did not give us more details on the number of test cases, test methods, ... And I began to see about creating interesting report for NUnit.I was lucky to find an open source here. Its authors call it NUnit2Report, but one disadvantage is it only running on .NET 1.0. Indeed too old compared to the current version 4.0. And I try to download the preview, but I could not run. I had to open its source code and found that it uses XSLT to convert the output of NUnit results from XML to HTML. Nothing really special, because I also knew that after NUnit run output file extension is XML is created. Author only use this file to convert to HTML using XSLT. And I decided to convert it to. NET 4.0, because I will not have to code from scratch. Conversion work made me take some time, but was lucky that I finally have what I want. Thanks Gilles for the this OSS. I will send a mail to thank him for his efforts but put this out for the OSS. Now I will show people how to do it. I used the auto built NAnt and NUnit for running TestCase, and I use Selenium testing framework. After writing three TestCase using Selenium, I ran NUnit, and got the following results: There are 1 fail and 2s success. In the bin directory of this project will have the NUnit output file as shown below: Then I create a build file, and a bat file for easy running (can use PowerShell is here also.) Double click in the bat file to create a report like this:       Finally open the index.html file in the folder to view report. As everyone can see, it is the TestCase and divide very clearly, that I meet the requirements. This is really good. Once again I really thank NUnit2Report from Gilles. People can contact him via the mail address [email protected] or website  http://nunit2report.sourceforge.net. It really is useful to those who promised to QA. Hopefully this post will help anyone really interested in doing reports for NUnit.   

    Read the article

  • How to make unit selection circles merge?

    - by MaT
    I would like to know how to make this effect of merged circle selection. Here are images to illustrate: Basically I'm looking for this effect: How the merge effect of the circles can be achieved ? I didn't found any explanation concerning this effect. I know that to project those texture I can develop a decal system but I don't know how to create the merging effect. If possible, I'm looking for purely shaders solution.

    Read the article

  • How to TDD test that objects are being added to a collection if the collection is private?

    - by Joshua Harris
    Assume that I planned to write a class that worked something like this: public class GameCharacter { private Collection<CharacterEffect> _collection; public void Add(CharacterEffect e) { ... } public void Remove(CharacterEffect e) { ... } public void Contains(CharacterEffect e) { ... } } When added an effect does something to the character and is then added to the _collection. When it is removed the effect reverts the change to the character and is removed from the _collection. It's easy to test if the effect was applied to the character, but how do I test that the effect was added to _collection? What test could I write to start constructing this class. I could write a test where Contains would return true for a certain effect being in _collection, but I can't arrange a case where that function would return true because I haven't implemented the Add method that is needed to place things in _collection. Ok, so since Contains is dependent on having Add working, then why don't I try to create Add first. Well for my first test I need to try and figure out if the effect was added to the _collection. How would I do that? The only way to see if an effect is in _collection is with the Contains function. The only way that I could think to test this would be to use a FakeCollection that Mocks the Add, Remove, and Contains of a real collection, but I don't want _collection being affected by outside sources. I don't want to add a setEffects(Collection effects) function, because I do not want the class to have that functionality. The one thing that I am thinking could work is this: public class GameCharacter<C extends Collection> { private Collection<CharacterEffect> _collection; public GameCharacter() { _collection = new C<CharacterEffect>(); } } But, that is just silly making me declare what some private data structures type is on every declaration of the character. Is there a way for me to test this without breaking TDD principles while still allowing me to keep my collection private?

    Read the article

  • White box testing with Google Test

    - by Daemin
    I've been trying out using GoogleTest for my C++ hobby project, and I need to test the internals of a component (hence white box testing). At my previous work we just made the test classes friends of the class being tested. But with Google Test that doesn't work as each test is given its own unique class, derived from the fixture class if specified, and friend-ness doesn't transfer to derived classes. Initially I created a test proxy class that is friends with the tested class. It contains a pointer to an instance of the tested class and provides methods for the required, but hidden, members. This worked for a simple class, but now I'm up to testing a tree class with an internal private node class, of which I need to access and mess with. I'm just wondering if anyone using the GoogleTest library has done any white box testing and if they have any hints or helpful constructs that would make this easier. Ok, I've found the FRIEND_TEST macro defined in the documentation, as well as some hints on how to test private code in the advanced guide. But apart from having a huge amount of friend declerations (i.e. one FRIEND_TEST for each test), is there an easier idion to use, or should I abandon using GoogleTest and move to a different test framework?

    Read the article

  • How do I inject test objects when the real objects are created dynamically?

    - by JW01
    I want to make a class testable using dependency injection. But the class creates multiple objects at runtime, and passes different values to their constructor. Here's a simplified example: public abstract class Validator { private ErrorList errors; public abstract void validate(); public void addError(String text) { errors.add( new ValidationError(text)); } public int getNumErrors() { return errors.count() } } public class AgeValidator extends Validator { public void validate() { addError("first name invalid"); addError("last name invalid"); } } (There are many other subclasses of Validator.) What's the best way to change this, so I can inject a fake object instead of ValidationError? I can create an AbstractValidationErrorFactory, and inject the factory instead. This would work, but it seems like I'll end up creating tons of little factories and factory interfaces, for every dependency of this sort. Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • Onsite Interview : QA Engineer with more Emphasis on Java Skills

    - by coolrockers2007
    Hello I'm having a onsite interview for QA engineer with Startup. While phone interview the person said he would want to test my JAVA, JUnit and SQL skills on white board with more importance on Object-oriented skills, So what all can i questions can i expect ? One more important issue : How do i overcome the fear of White board interview ?. I'm very bad at White board sessions, i get fully tensed. Please suggest me tips to overcome my jinx

    Read the article

  • Testcase runner for parametrized testcases

    - by Razer
    Let me explain my situation. I'm planning a kind of test case runner for doing testcases on external devices, which are microcontroller based. Lets consider the devices: Device 1 Device 2 There exist a lot of test cases which can be run with one of the devices above. For example: Testcase 1 Testcase 2 The main reason that all the testcases can be run with any device is, that the testcases validates some standard and this software should be extensible for future devices. The testcases itself must be runnable with changing parameters. For example Testcase 1 does some Timing Verification the testcase needs as input parameter the datarate: 4800, 9600, 19200. Now hoping you understand the situation, let me explain my design questions. For implementing the test cases I thought about an Attribute based approach, like nunit does it. The more complicated problem is, how to define the parametrized testcases? Like this: Device 1: Testcase 1: datarate: 4800, 9600, 19200 Testcase 2: supply: 1, 2, 3 Device 2: Testcase 1: datarate: 9600, 19200, 38400 Testcase 2: supply: 3, 4, 5 How would you design such a framework? I've done a similar desin in python where I had for every device a XML containing the testcase definitions like: <Testcase="Testcase 1" datarate=4800/> <Testcase="Testcase 1" datarate=9600/> <Testcase="Testcase 1" datarate=19200/>

    Read the article

  • LED 49-unit Quadcopter Formation Foreshadows The Robot Takeover

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    Perhaps there are a few more steps between 49 semi-autonomous quadcopters doing a little aerial dancing and Skynet, but we’re awed and apprehensive at the same time. Check out the video to see them in action. The video comes to us courtesy of a German art conference, Ars Electronica, and a colloboration between two design groups Futurelab and Ascending Technologies GmbH. The above video is just their warmup routine; according to YouTube comments they’ll be uploading even more videos of the quadcopters and their synchronized night flights in the coming days. [via Motherboard] HTG Explains: Is ReadyBoost Worth Using? HTG Explains: What The Windows Event Viewer Is and How You Can Use It HTG Explains: How Windows Uses The Task Scheduler for System Tasks

    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 | 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48  | Next Page >