Search Results

Search found 7245 results on 290 pages for 'meta 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 43/290 | < Previous Page | 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50  | Next Page >

  • Database unit testing is now available for SSDT

    - by jamiet
    Good news was announced yesterday for those that are using SSDT and want to write unit tests, unit testing functionality is now available. The announcement was made on the SSDT team blog in post Available Today: SSDT—December 2012. Here are a few thoughts about this news. Firstly, there seems to be a general impression that database unit testing was not previously available for SSDT – that’s not entirely true. Database unit testing was most recently delivered in Visual Studio 2010 and any database unit tests written therein work perfectly well against SQL Server databases created using SSDT (why wouldn’t they – its just a database after all). In other words, if you’re running SSDT inside Visual Studio 2010 then you could carry on freely writing database unit tests; some of the tight integration between the two (e.g. right-click on an object in SQL Server Object Explorer and choose to create a unit test) was not there – but I’ve never found that to be a problem. I am currently working on a project that uses SSDT for database development and have been happily running VS2010 database unit tests for a few months now. All that being said, delivery of database unit testing for SSDT is now with us and that is good news, not least because we now have the ability to create unit tests in VS2012. We also get tight integration with SSDT itself, the like of which I mentioned above. Having now had a look at the new features I was delighted to find that one of my big complaints about database unit testing has been solved. As I reported here on Connect a refactor operation would cause unit test code to get completely mangled. See here the before and after from such an operation: SELECT    * FROM    bi.ProcessMessageLog pml INNER JOIN bi.[LogMessageType] lmt     ON    pml.[LogMessageTypeId] = lmt.[LogMessageTypeId] WHERE    pml.[LogMessage] = 'Ski[LogMessageTypeName]of message: IApplicationCanceled' AND        lmt.[LogMessageType] = 'Warning'; which is obviously not ideal. Thankfully that seems to have been solved with this latest release. One disappointment about this new release is that the process for running tests as part of a CI build has not changed from the horrendously complicated process required previously. Check out my blog post Setting up database unit testing as part of a Continuous Integration build process [VS2010 DB Tools - Datadude] for instructions on how to do it. In that blog post I describe it as “fiddly” – I was being kind when I said that! @Jamiet

    Read the article

  • jQuery hide/show div working in Opera and Chrome but not IE/Firefox

    - by injekt
    Hey guys, the following snippet of jQuery code seems to work fine in Google Chrome and Opera, but nothing happens when I try hiding/showing the related div in Internet Explorer or Firefox. Any ideas? $(function() { $(".paste-meta-small .right a.collapse").click(function(event) { $(this).parents(".paste-meta-small").next(".highlight").toggle(500); $(this).text($(this).text() == 'show' ? 'hide' : 'show'); event.preventDefault(); }) }) $(function() { $(".highlight-meta a.blog-collapse").click(function(event) { $(this).parents(".highlight-meta").next(".blog-highlight").toggle(500); $(this).text($(this).text() == 'show' ? 'hide' : 'show'); var margin = ($(this).text() == "show" ? "15px" : "0"); $(this).parents(".highlight-meta").css("margin-bottom", margin); event.preventDefault(); }) }) A working example can be found here Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Benchmarks Using Oracle Solaris 11

    - by Brian
    The following is a list of links to recent benchmarks which used Oracle Solaris 11. Oracle TimesTen In-Memory Database Performance on SPARC T4-2 World Record Performance on PeopleSoft Enterprise Financials Benchmark on SPARC T4-2 SPARC T4 Servers Running Oracle Solaris 11 and Oracle RAC Deliver World Record on PeopleSoft HRMS 9.1 SPEC CPU2006 Results on Oracle's Sun x86 Servers SPARC T4-4 Beats 8-CPU IBM POWER7 on TPC-H @3000GB Benchmark SPARC T4-2 Delivers World Record SPECjvm2008 Result with Oracle Solaris 11 SPARC T4-2 Server Beats Intel (Westmere AES-NI) on ZFS Encryption Tests SPARC T4 Processor Beats Intel (Westmere AES-NI) on AES Encryption Tests SPARC T4 Processor Outperforms IBM POWER7 and Intel (Westmere AES-NI) on OpenSSL AES Encryption Test SPARC T4-1 Server Outperforms Intel (Westmere AES-NI) on IPsec Encryption Tests SPARC T4-2 Server Beats Intel (Westmere AES-NI) on SSL Network Tests SPARC T4-2 Server Beats Intel (Westmere AES-NI) on Oracle Database Tablespace Encryption Queries

    Read the article

  • Achieving decoupling in Model classes

    - by Guven
    I am trying to test-drive (or at least write unit tests) my Model classes but I noticed that my classes end up being too coupled. Since I can't break this coupling, writing unit tests is becoming harder and harder. To be more specific: Model Classes: These are the classes that hold the data in my application. They resemble pretty much the POJO (plain old Java objects), but they also have some methods. The application is not too big so I have around 15 model classes. Coupling: Just to give an example, think of a simple case of Order Header - Order Item. The header knows the item and the item knows the header (needs some information from the header for performing certain operations). Then, let's say there is the relationship between Order Item - Item Report. The item report needs the item as well. At this point, imagine writing tests for Item Report; you need have a Order Header to carry out the tests. This is a simple case with 3 classes; things get more complicated with more classes. I can come up with decoupled classes when I design algorithms, persistence layers, UI interactions, etc... but with model classes, I can't think of a way to separate them. They currently sit as one big chunk of classes that depend on each other. Here are some workarounds that I can think of: Data Generators: I have a package that generates sample data for my model classes. For example, the OrderHeaderGenerator class creates OrderHeaders with some basic data in it. I use the OrderHeaderGenerator from my ItemReport unit-tests so that I get an instance to OrderHeader class. The problem is these generators get complicated pretty fast and then I also need to test these generators; defeating the purpose a little bit. Interfaces instead of dependencies: I can come up with interfaces to get rid of the hard dependencies. For example, the OrderItem class would depend on the IOrderHeader interface. So, in my unit tests, I can easily mock the behaviour of an OrderHeader with a FakeOrderHeader class that implements the IOrderHeader interface. The problem with this approach is the complexity that the Model classes would end up having. Would you have other ideas on how to break this coupling in the model classes? Or, how to make it easier to unit-test the model classes?

    Read the article

  • Take Two: Comparing JVMs on ARM/Linux

    - by user12608080
    Although the intent of the previous article, entitled Comparing JVMs on ARM/Linux, was to introduce and highlight the availability of the HotSpot server compiler (referred to as c2) for Java SE-Embedded ARM v7,  it seems, based on feedback, that everyone was more interested in the OpenJDK comparisons to Java SE-E.  In fact there were two main concerns: The fact that the previous article compared Java SE-E 7 against OpenJDK 6 might be construed as an unlevel playing field because version 7 is newer and therefore potentially more optimized. That the generic compiler settings chosen to build the OpenJDK implementations did not put those versions in a particularly favorable light. With those considerations in mind, we'll institute the following changes to this version of the benchmarking: In order to help alleviate an additional concern that there is some sort of benchmark bias, we'll use a different suite, called DaCapo.  Funded and supported by many prestigious organizations, DaCapo's aim is to benchmark real world applications.  Further information about DaCapo can be found at http://dacapobench.org. At the suggestion of Xerxes Ranby, who has been a great help through this entire exercise, a newer Linux distribution will be used to assure that the OpenJDK implementations were built with more optimal compiler settings.  The Linux distribution in this instance is Ubuntu 11.10 Oneiric Ocelot. Having experienced difficulties getting Ubuntu 11.10 to run on the original D2Plug ARMv7 platform, for these benchmarks, we'll switch to an embedded system that has a supported Ubuntu 11.10 release.  That platform is the Freescale i.MX53 Quick Start Board.  It has an ARMv7 Coretex-A8 processor running at 1GHz with 1GB RAM. We'll limit comparisons to 4 JVM implementations: Java SE-E 7 Update 2 c1 compiler (default) Java SE-E 6 Update 30 (c1 compiler is the only option) OpenJDK 6 IcedTea6 1.11pre 6b23~pre11-0ubuntu1.11.10.2 CACAO build 1.1.0pre2 OpenJDK 6 IcedTea6 1.11pre 6b23~pre11-0ubuntu1.11.10.2 JamVM build-1.6.0-devel Certain OpenJDK implementations were eliminated from this round of testing for the simple reason that their performance was not competitive.  The Java SE 7u2 c2 compiler was also removed because although quite respectable, it did not perform as well as the c1 compilers.  Recall that c2 works optimally in long-lived situations.  Many of these benchmarks completed in a relatively short period of time.  To get a feel for where c2 shines, take a look at the first chart in this blog. The first chart that follows includes performance of all benchmark runs on all platforms.  Later on we'll look more at individual tests.  In all runs, smaller means faster.  The DaCapo aficionado may notice that only 10 of the 14 DaCapo tests for this version were executed.  The reason for this is that these 10 tests represent the only ones successfully completed by all 4 JVMs.  Only the Java SE-E 6u30 could successfully run all of the tests.  Both OpenJDK instances not only failed to complete certain tests, but also experienced VM aborts too. One of the first observations that can be made between Java SE-E 6 and 7 is that, for all intents and purposes, they are on par with regards to performance.  While it is a fact that successive Java SE releases add additional optimizations, it is also true that Java SE 7 introduces additional complexity to the Java platform thus balancing out any potential performance gains at this point.  We are still early into Java SE 7.  We would expect further performance enhancements for Java SE-E 7 in future updates. In comparing Java SE-E to OpenJDK performance, among both OpenJDK VMs, Cacao results are respectable in 4 of the 10 tests.  The charts that follow show the individual results of those four tests.  Both Java SE-E versions do win every test and outperform Cacao in the range of 9% to 55%. For the remaining 6 tests, Java SE-E significantly outperforms Cacao in the range of 114% to 311% So it looks like OpenJDK results are mixed for this round of benchmarks.  In some cases, performance looks to have improved.  But in a majority of instances, OpenJDK still lags behind Java SE-Embedded considerably. Time to put on my asbestos suit.  Let the flames begin...

    Read the article

  • Testing Reference Data Mappings

    - by Michael Stephenson
    Background Mapping reference data is one of the common scenarios in BizTalk development and its usually a bit of a pain when you need to manage a lot of reference data whether it be through the BizTalk Cross Referencing features or some kind of custom solution. I have seen many cases where only a couple of the mapping conditions are ever tested. Approach As usual I like to see these things tested in isolation before you start using them in your BizTalk maps so you know your mapping functions are working as expected. This approach can be used for almost all of your reference data type mapping functions where you can take advantage of MSTests data driven tests to test lots of conditions without having to write millions of tests. Walk Through Rather than go into the details of this here, I'm going to call out to one of my colleagues who wrote a nice little walk through about using data driven tests a while back. Check out Callum's blog: http://callumhibbert.blogspot.com/2009/07/data-driven-tests-with-mstest.html

    Read the article

  • What should be done first: Code reviews or Unit tests?

    - by goldenmean
    Hello, If a developer implements code for some module and wants to get it reviewed. What should be the order : *First unit test the module after designing test cases for the module, debugging and fixing the bugs and then give the modified code for peer code review (Pros- Code to be reviewed is 'clean' to a good extent. Reduces some avoidable review comments and rework. Cons- Developer might spend large time debugging/fixing a bug which could have pointed/anticipated in peer code reviews) Or *First do the code review with peers and then go for unit testing. What are your thoughts/experience on this? I believe this approach for unit testing, code reviewing should be programming language agnostic, but it would be interesting to know otherwise(if applicable) with specific examples. -AD

    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 inject ServletContext for JUnit tests with Spring?

    - by Juri Glass
    Hi I want to unit test a RESTful interface written with Apache CXF. I use a ServletContext to load some resources, so I have: @Context private ServletContext servletContext; If I deploy this on Glassfish, the ServletContext is injected and it works like expected. But I don't know how to inject the ServletContext in my service class, so that I can test it with a JUnit test. I use Spring 3.0, JUnit 4, CXF 2.2.3 and Maven.

    Read the article

  • How to unit test models in MVC / MVR app?

    - by BBnyc
    I'm building a node.js web app and am trying to do so for the first time in a test driven fashion. I'm using nodeunit for testing, which I find allows me to write tests quickly and painlessly. In this particular app, the heavy lifting primarily involves translating SQL data into complex Javascript object and serving them to the front-end via json. Likewise, the app also spends a great deal of code validating and translating complex, multidimensional Javascript objects it receives from the front-end into SQL rows. Hence I have used a fat model design for the app -- most of the real code resides in the models, where the data translation happens. What's the best approach to test such models with unit tests? I mean in particular the methods that have create javascript objects from the SQL rows and serve them to the front-end. Right now what I'm doing is making particular requests of my models with the unit tests and checking the returned data for all of the fields that should be there. However I have a suspicion that this is not the most robust kind of testing I could be doing. My current testing design also means I have to package my app code with some dummy data so that my tests can anticipate the kind of data that the app should be returning when tests run.

    Read the article

  • Stylecop 4.7.36.0 is out!

    - by TATWORTH
    Stylecop 4.7.36.0 has been released at http://stylecop.codeplex.com/releases/view/79972This is an update to coincide with the latest ReSharper. The full fix list is:4.7.36.0 (508dbac00ffc)=======================Fix for 7344. Don't throw 1126 inside default expressions.Fix for 7371. Compare Namespace parts using the CurrentCulture and not InvariantCulture.Fix for 7386. Don't throw casing violations for filed names in languages that do not support case (like Chinese). Added new tests.fix for 7380. Catch Exception caused by CRM Toolkit.Update ReSharper 7.0 dependency to 7.0.1 (7.0.1098.2760)Fix for 7358. Use the RuleId in the call to MSBuild Logging.Fix for 7348. Update suggestion text for constructors.Fix for 7364. Don't throw 1126 for New Array Expressions.Fix for 7372. Throw 1126 inside catch blocks wasn't working. Add new tests.Fix for 7369. Await is allowed to be inside parenthesis. Add new tests.Fix testsCorrect styling issues.Fix for 7373. Typeparam violations were not being thrown in all cases. Added new tests.Fix for 7361. Rule 1120 was logging against the root element and so Suppressions wouldn't work. Fixed and added tests.Updating de-DE resources - from Michael Diermeier - thank you.Change for 7368. Add the violation count into the Task outputs.Fix for 7383. Fix for memory leak in plugins.Update environment to detect ReSharper 7Fix for 7378. Null reference exception from command line run in message output.Update release history.

    Read the article

  • Groovy support in Java EE projects

    - by Martin Janicek
    As requested in the issue 144038, I've implemented support for Groovy in a Java enterprise projects. You should be able to combine Java/Groovy files, run them and thanks to the new Groovy JUnit tests support you can also run groovy tests together with your existing Java tests. I hope it will make your enterprise development (and especially enterprise testing) easier and more productive. Note: The changes will be propagated to the NetBeans daily build in a few days, so please stay in touch!

    Read the article

  • How to run SpecFlow tests in Visual Studio 2010?

    - by testerboy
    Trying to get SpecFlow running with a fresh VS2010 Professional install. Created a new console application and added references to NUnit and SpecFlow. Created a SpecFlow feature. The .feature with the default template code is created. Now I try to run this test, but I don't understand how. When I right-click the project (at the top-level), there is no "Run test(s)" option in the mouse drop down menu. Didn't the SpecFlow install correctly, am I missing some references or some other tool I need to install?

    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

  • Make audible Ding! sound, or growl notification, when `rake test` finishes!

    - by Jordan Feldstein
    I lose a ton of productivity by getting distracted while waiting for my tests to run. Usually, I'll start to look at something while they're loading --- and 15-20 minutes later I realize my tests are long done, and I've spent 10 minutes reading online. Make a small change... rerun tests ... another 10-15 minutes wasted! How can I make my computer make some kind of alert (Sound or growl notification) when my tests finish, so I can snap back to what I was doing??

    Read the article

  • Agile team with no dedicated Tester members. Insane or efficient?

    - by MetaFight
    I'm a software developer. I've been thinking a lot about the efficiency of the Software Testers I've worked with so far in my career. In fact, I've been thinking a lot about the Software Testers role in general and have reached a potentially contentious conclusion: Non-developer Software Testers staff are less efficient at software testing than developers. Now, before everyone gets upset, hear me out. This isn't mere opinion: Software Testing and Software Development both require a lot of skills in common: Problem solving Thinking about corner cases Analytical skills The ability to define clear and concise step-by-step scenarios What developers have in addition to this is the ability to automate their tests. Yes, I know non-dev testers can automate their tests too, but that often then becomes a test maintenance issue. Because automating UI tests is essentially programming, non-dev members encounter all the same difficulties software developers encounter: Copy-pasta, lack of code reusibility/maintainability, etc. So, I was wondering. Why not replace all non-dev roles with developer roles? Developers have the skills required to perform Software Testing tasks, and they have the skills to automate tests and keep them maintainable. Would the following work: Hire a bunch of developers and split them into 2 roles: Software developers Software developers doing testing (some manual, mostly automated by writing integration tests, unit tests, etc) Software developers doing application support. (I've removed this as it is probably a separate question altogether) And, in our case since we're doing Agile development, rotate the roles every sprint or two. Also, if at all possible, try to have people spend their Developer stints and Testing stints on different projects. Ideally you would want to reduce the turnover rate per rotation. So maybe you could have 2 groups and make sure the rotation cycles of the groups are elided. So, for example, if each rotation was two sprints long, the two groups would have their rotations 1 sprint apart. That way there's only a 50% turn-over rate per sprint. Am I crazy, or could this work? (Obviously a key component to this working is that all devs want to be in the 3 roles. Let's assume I'm starting a new company and I can hire these ideal people) Edit I've removed the phrase "QA", as apparently we are using it incorrectly where I work.

    Read the article

  • Should developers be involved in testing phases?

    - by LudoMC
    Hi, we are using a classical V-shaped development process. We then have requirements, architecture, design, implementation, integration tests, system tests and acceptance. Testers are preparing test cases during the first phases of the project. The issue is that, due to resources issues (*), test phases are too long and are often shortened due to time constraints (you know project managers... ;)). So my question is simple: should developers be involved in the tests phases and isn't it too 'dangerous'. I'm afraid it will give the project managers a false feeling of better quality as the work has been done but would the added man.days be of any value? I'm not really confident of developers doing tests (no offense here but we all know it's quite hard to break in a few clicks what you have made in severals days). Thanks for sharing your thoughts. (*) For obscure reasons, increasing the number of testers is not an option as of today. (Just upfront, it's not a duplicate of Should programmers help testers in designing tests? which talks about test preparation and not test execution, where we avoid the implication of developers)

    Read the article

  • How best to organize projects folders for unit tests in .NET?

    - by Dan Bailiff
    So I'm trying to introduce unit testing to my group. I've successfully upgraded a VS'05 web site project to a VS'08 web application, and now have a solution with the web app project and a unit test project. The issue now is how to fit this back into the source repository such that we don't break the build system and the unit test projects are persisted as well. Right now we have something like this: c:\root c:\root\projectA c:\root\projectB c:\root\projectC where projectA contains the sln file and all other related files/folders for the project. Now I have this new solution that looks like this: c:\root\projectA (parent folder) c:\root\projectA\projectA (the production code project) c:\root\projectA\projectA_Test (the unit test project) c:\root\projectA\TestResults c:\root\projecta\projectA.sln How do I integrate this new structure back into the code repository? I'd really prefer to keep the production code folder where it was in the source repository for the sake of the build, but is this necessary? If I keep the production code project in its usual place then where do I keep my unit test projects and how do I connect them with a sln file? Is it better to use this new structure and adjust the build process? I'd love to hear how other people are dealing with this issue of upgrading legacy projects to unit testing.

    Read the article

  • How Can I Run a Regex that Tests Text for Characters in a Particular Alphabet or Script?

    - by Eli
    I'd like to make a regex in Perl that will test a string for a characters in a particular string. This would be something like: $text =~ .*P{'Chinese'}.* Is there a simple way of doing this, for English it's pretty easy by just testing for [a-zA-Z], but for a script like Chinese, or one of the Japanese scripts, I can't figure out any way of doing this short of writing out every character explicitly, which would make for some very ugly code. Ideas? I can't be the first/only person that's wanted to do this.

    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 | 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50  | Next Page >