Use pytest fixture in a function decorator - python-2.7

I want to build a decorator for my test functions which has several uses. One of them is helping to add properties to the generated junitxml.
I know there's a fixture built-in pytest for this called record_property that does exactly that. How can I use this fixture inside my decorator?
def my_decorator(arg1):
def test_decorator(func):
def func_wrapper():
# hopefully somehow use record_property with arg1 here
# do some other logic here
return func()
return func_wrapper
return test_decorator
#my_decorator('some_argument')
def test_this():
pass # do actual assertions etc.
I know I can pass the fixture directly into every test function and use it in the tests, but I have a lot of tests and it seems extremely redundant to do this.
Also, I know I can use conftest.py and create a custom marker and call it in the decorator, but I have a lot of conftest.py files and I don't manage all of them alone so I can't enforce it.
Lastly, trying to import the fixture directly in to my decorator module and then using it results in an error - so that's a no go also.
Thanks for the help

It's a bit late but I came across the same problem in our code base. I could find a solution to it but it is rather hacky, so I wouldn't give a guarantee that it works with older versions or will prevail in the future.
Hence I asked if there is a better solution. You can check it out here: How to use pytest fixtures in a decorator without having it as argument on the decorated function
The idea is to basically register the test functions which are decorated and then trick pytest into thinking they would require the fixture in their argument list:
class RegisterTestData:
# global testdata registry
testdata_identifier_map = {} # Dict[str, List[str]]
def __init__(self, testdata_identifier, direct_import = True):
self.testdata_identifier = testdata_identifier
self.direct_import = direct_import
self._always_pass_my_import_fixture = False
def __call__(self, func):
if func.__name__ in RegisterTestData.testdata_identifier_map:
RegisterTestData.testdata_identifier_map[func.__name__].append(self.testdata_identifier)
else:
RegisterTestData.testdata_identifier_map[func.__name__] = [self.testdata_identifier]
# We need to know if we decorate the original function, or if it was already
# decorated with another RegisterTestData decorator. This is necessary to
# determine if the direct_import fixture needs to be passed down or not
if getattr(func, "_decorated_with_register_testdata", False):
self._always_pass_my_import_fixture = True
setattr(func, "_decorated_with_register_testdata", True)
#functools.wraps(func)
#pytest.mark.usefixtures("my_import_fixture") # register the fixture to the test in case it doesn't have it as argument
def wrapper(*args: Any, my_import_fixture, **kwargs: Any):
# Because of the signature of the wrapper, my_import_fixture is not part
# of the kwargs which is passed to the decorated function. In case the
# decorated function has my_import_fixture in the signature we need to pack
# it back into the **kwargs. This is always and especially true for the
# wrapper itself even if the decorated function does not have
# my_import_fixture in its signature
if self._always_pass_my_import_fixture or any(
"my_import_fixture" in p.name for p in signature(func).parameters.values()
):
kwargs["my_import_fixture"] = my_import_fixture
if self.direct_import:
my_import_fixture.import_all()
return func(*args, **kwargs)
return wrapper
def pytest_collection_modifyitems(config: Config, items: List[Item]) -> None:
for item in items:
if item.name in RegisterTestData.testdata_identifier_map and "my_import_fixture" not in item._fixtureinfo.argnames:
# Hack to trick pytest into thinking the my_import_fixture is part of the argument list of the original function
# Only works because of #pytest.mark.usefixtures("my_import_fixture") in the decorator
item._fixtureinfo.argnames = item._fixtureinfo.argnames + ("my_import_fixture",)

Related

HTML report for django tests

I have a Django project containing an API (created with rest framework if that counts anywhere). I have added some tests for the API but in order to have an overall view of the tests, either passing, either failing or missing, I need to create an HTML report.
When the tests are finished a HTML table report should be generated which shows the endpoints and HTTP responses covered during tests, the results of the tests plus the combinations which are missing the tests.
Unfortunately I cannot understand how should I do that. I know that coverage can give me a detailed html report, but that's not what I need, I need something like this:
| Endpoint description | 200 | 400 | 403 | 404 |
| GET /endpoint1 | PASS | PASS |PASS | N/A |
| POST /endpoint1 | PASS | FAIL |MISSING| N/A |
Does anybody has any idea about that? Maybe some libs that could help out with that or what strategy should I use for that?
Thank you in advance
Late to the party, but this is my solution to outputting a HTML test report for Django tests. (based on HtmlTestRunner cannot be directly used with Django DiscoverRunner)
The following classes if placed in tests/html_test_reporter.py can be used as a DiscoverRunner which is patched to use HTMLTestRunner.
from django.test.runner import DiscoverRunner
from HtmlTestRunner import HTMLTestRunner
class MyHTMLTestRunner(HTMLTestRunner):
def __init__(self, **kwargs):
# Pass any required options to HTMLTestRunner
super().__init__(combine_reports=True, report_name='all_tests', add_timestamp=False, **kwargs)
class HtmlTestReporter(DiscoverRunner):
def __init__(self, **kwargs):
super().__init__(**kwargs)
# Patch over the test_runner in the super class.
html_test_runner = MyHTMLTestRunner
self.test_runner=html_test_runner
Then this is run with:
python manage.py test -v 2 --testrunner tests.html_test_reporter.HtmlTestReporter
By default Django projects use django.test.runner.DiscoverRunner to search for tests and then use PyTest to run them. HTMLTestRunner can be used with PyTest to output a HTML test report, but it does seem possible to configure PyTest to use HTMLRunner through DiscoverRunner.
Hope this helps.
As Django uses the python's standard unittest library, you'll have to tweak some of its parts.
First, you'll need some way to specify which tests actually test which endpoint. A custom decorator is handy for that:
from functools import wraps
def endpoint(path, code):
"""
Mark some test as one which tests specific endpoint.
"""
def inner(func):
#wraps(func)
def wrapper(*args, **kwargs):
return func(*args, **kwargs)
return wrapper
inner._endpoint_path = path
inner._endpoint_code = code
return inner
class MyTestCase(TestCase):
#endpoint(path='/path/one', code=200)
def test_my_path_is_ok(self):
response = self.client.get('/path/one?foo=bar')
self.assertEqual(response.status_code, 200)
#endpoint(path='/path/one', code=404)
def test_my_path_expected_errors(self):
response = self.client.get('/path/one?foo=qux')
self.assertEqual(response.status_code, 404)
def test_some_other_stuff(self):
# this one will not be included in our results grid.
pass
You could use a "magical" approach (e.g. special methods' names to guess the endpoint they are testing) instead, but explicit is better than implicit, right?
Then, you need a way to collect the results of your tests - specifically, of that which test the endpoints. Here we make a (very draft) subclass of unittest.TestResult to handle it:
class EndpointsTestResult(TestResult):
def __init__(self):
super(EndpointsTestResult, self).__init__()
self.endpoint_results = {}
def addError(self, test, err):
super(EndpointsTestResult, self).addError(test, err)
if hasattr(test, '_endpoint_path'):
branch = self.endpoint_results.setdefault(getattr(test, '_endpoint_path'), {})
branch[getattr(test, '_endpoint_code')] = 'MISSING'
def addFailure(self, test, err):
# similar as addError()
def addSuccess(self, test):
# similar as addError()
Finally it's time to actually output our results. Let's make a sublass of the unittest.TextTestRunner and specify it in our custom runner:
class EndpointsTestRunner(TextTestRunner):
def _makeResult(self):
self._result = EndpointsTestResult()
return self._result
def run(self, test):
super(EndpointsTestRunner).run(test)
# After running a test, print out the table
generate_a_nifty_table(self._result.endpoint_results)
class EndpointsDjangoRunner(django.test.runner.DiscoverRunner):
test_runner = EndpointsTestRunner
Now we have our custom EndpointsDjangoRunner, and we should specify it in the settings.py:
TEST_RUNNER = 'path.to.the.EndpointsDjangoRunner'
That's it. Please let me know if you spot any awkward errors in the code.

Unit testing twisted.web.client.Agent's without the network

I've not done any twisted now for a couple of years and have started using the newer Agent style of client http calls. Using Agent has been OK, but testing is confusing me (it's twisted after all).
I've been through the https://twistedmatrix.com/documents/current/core/howto/trial.html docs and the APIs on trial tools and Agent itself. Also numerous searches.
I've gone with faking out Agent, as I don't need to test that. But then because of the steps to handle the processing and response of an Agent request, my test code has got nasty, implementing the nested layers of the Agent, protocol, etc. Where should I draw the line here and are there some utils I haven't found?
Here's a minimal example (naive implementation of SUT):
from twisted.web.client import Agent, readBody
from twisted.internet import reactor
import json
class SystemUnderTest(object):
def __init__(self, url):
self.url = url
def action(self):
d = self._makeAgent().request("GET", self.url)
d.addCallback(self._cbSuccess)
return d
def _makeAgent(self):
''' It's own method so can be overridden in tests '''
return Agent(reactor)
def _cbSuccess(self, response):
d = readBody(response)
d.addCallback(self._cbParse)
return d
def _cbParse(self, data):
self.result = json.loads(data)
print self.result
with the test module:
from twisted.trial import unittest
from sut import SystemUnderTest
from twisted.internet import defer
from twisted.test import proto_helpers
class Test(unittest.TestCase):
def test1(self):
s_u_t = ExtendedSystemUnderTest(None)
d = s_u_t.action()
d.addCallback(self._checks, s_u_t)
return d
def _checks(self, result, s_u_t):
print result
self.assertEqual({'one':1}, s_u_t.result)
class ExtendedSystemUnderTest(SystemUnderTest):
def _makeAgent(self):
return FakeSuccessfulAgent("{'one':1}")
## Getting ridiculous below here...
class FakeReason(object):
def check(self, _):
return False
def __str__(self):
return "It's my reason"
class FakeResponse(object):
''' Implementation of IResponse '''
def __init__(self, content):
self.content = content
self.prot = proto_helpers.StringTransport()
self.code = 200
self.phrase = ''
def deliverBody(self, prot):
prot.makeConnection(self.prot)
prot.dataReceived(self.content)
# reason = FakeReason()
# prot.connectionLost(reason)
class FakeSuccessfulAgent(object):
''' Implementation of IAgent '''
def __init__(self, response):
self.response = response
def request(self, method, url):
return defer.succeed(FakeResponse(self.response))
but testing is confusing me (it's twisted after all).
Hilarious.
class ExtendedSystemUnderTest(SystemUnderTest):
def _makeAgent(self):
return FakeSuccessfulAgent("{'one':1}")
I suggest you make the agent to use a normal parameter. This is more convenient than a private method like _makeAgent. Composition is great. Inheritance is meh.
class FakeReason(object):
...
There's no reason to make a fake of this. Just use twisted.python.failure.Failure. You don't have to fake every object in the test. Just the ones that get in your way if you don't fake them.
class FakeResponse(object):
...
This is likely good and necessary.
class FakeSuccessfulAgent(object):
...
This is most likely necessary as well. You should make it actually be more like an IAgent implementation though - declare that it implements the interface, use zope.interface.verify.verify{Class,Object} to make sure you get the implementation write, etc (eg request has the wrong signature now).
There's actually a ticket for adding all of these testing tools to Twisted itself - https://twistedmatrix.com/trac/ticket/4024. So I don't think you're actually confused, you're basically on the same track as the project itself. You're just suffering from the fact that Twisted hasn't already done all of this work for you.
Also, note that instead of:
class Test(unittest.TestCase):
def test1(self):
s_u_t = ExtendedSystemUnderTest(None)
d = s_u_t.action()
d.addCallback(self._checks, s_u_t)
return d
You can write something like this instead (and it is preferable):
class Test(unittest.TestCase):
def test1(self):
s_u_t = ExtendedSystemUnderTest(None)
d = s_u_t.action()
self._checks(s_u_t, self.successResultOf(d))
This is because your fake implementation of IAgent is synchronous. You know it is synchronous. By the time request returns, the Deferred it is returning has a result already. Writing the test this way means you can simplify your code a bit (ie, you can ignore the asynchronousness of it to some extent - because it isn't) and it avoids running the global reactor which is what returning a Deferred from a test method in trial does.

Using tastypie api from other views

I am calling tastypie api from normal django views.
def test(request):
view = resolve("/api/v1/albumimage/like/user/%d/" % 2 )
accept = request.META.get("HTTP_ACCEPT")
accept += ",application/json"
request.META["HTTP_ACCEPT"] = accept
res = view.func(request, **view.kwargs)
return HttpResponse(res._container)
Using tastypie resource in view
Call an API on my server from another view
achieve the same thing but seems harder.
Is my way of calling api acceptable?
Besides, it would be awesome if I could get the result in python dictionary instead of json.
Is it possible?
If you need a dictionary, it means that you must design your application better. Don't do important stuff in your views, nor in the Tastypie methods. Refactor it to have common funcionality.
As a general rule, views must be small. No more than 15 lines. That makes the code readable, reusable and easy to test.
I'll provide an example to make it clearer, suppose in that Tastypie method you must be creating a Like object, maybe sending a signal:
class AlbumImageResource(ModelResource):
def like_method(self, request, **kwargs):
# Do some method checking
Like.objects.create(
user=request.user,
object=request.data.get("object")
)
signals.liked_object(request.user, request.data.get("object"))
# Something more
But, if you need to reuse that behavior in a view, the proper thing would be to factorize that in a different function:
# myapp.utils
def like_object(user, object):
like = Like.objects.create(
user=request.user,
object=request.data.get("object")
)
signals.liked_object(request.user, request.data.get("object"))
return like
Now you can call it from your API method and your view:
class AlbumImageResource(ModelResource):
def like_method(self, request, **kwargs):
# Do some method checking
like_object(request.user, request.data.get("object")) # Here!
And in your view...
# Your view
def test(request, object_id):
obj = get_object_or_404(Object, id=object_id)
like_object(request.user, obj)
return HttpResponse()
Hope it helps.

Django - Celery: #transaction and #task don't stack

I want to run a Django - Celery task with manual transaction management, but it seems that the annotations do not stack.
e.g.
def ping():
print 'ping'
pong.delay('arg')
#task(ignore_result=True)
#transaction.commit_manually()
def pong(arg):
print 'pong: %s' % arg
transaction.rollback()
results in
TypeError: pong() got an unexpected keyword argument 'task_name'
while the reverse annotation order results in
---> 22 pong.delay('arg')
AttributeError: 'function' object has no attribute 'delay'
It makes sense, but I'm having trouble finding a nice workaround. The Django docs don't mention alternatives to the annotation, and I don't want to make a class for each celery Task when I don't need one.
Any ideas?
Previously Celery had some magic where a set of default keyword arguments
were passed to the task if it accepted them.
Since version 2.2 you can disable this behaviour, but the easiest is to
import the task decorator from celery.task instead of celery.decorators:
from celery.task import task
#task
#transaction.commit_manually
def t():
pass
The decorators module is deprecated and will be completely removed in 3.0,
and the same for the "magic keyword arguments"
Note:
For custom Task classes you should set the accept_magic_kwargs attribute to False:
class MyTask(Task):
accept_magic_kwargs = False
Note2: Make sure your custom decorators preserves the name of the function using functools.wraps, otherwise the task will end up with the wrong name.
The task decorator generates a class x(Task) from your function with the run method as your target. Suggest you define the class and decorate the method.
Untested e.g.:
class pong(Task):
ignore_result = True
#transaction.commit_manually()
def run(self,arg,**kwargs):
print 'pong: %s' % arg
transaction.rollback()

Django template context function without running automatically

Sorry or the confusing title! It's actually a lot simpler than it sounds.
I've got a function:
def get_messages(request):
# do something expensive with the request
return 'string'
I want to be able to call that function from the template, so I've strapped in with a context processor:
def context_processor(request):
return {'messages':get_messages(request)}
So now when I have {{messages}} in my template, string prints out. Great.
The problem is get_messages is quite expensive and isn't always needed. Less than half the templates need it. Is there a way of passing the function to the template and leave it up to the template if it runs or not?
I tried this already:
def context_processor(request):
return {'messages':get_messages}
But that just outputs the function description <function get_messages at 0x23e97d0> in the template instead of running it.
I think You shouldn't mix logic of application with template (the view in MVC pattern). This breaks consistency the architecture. You can call get_messages in views that need it and simply pass messages to the template context, in the others just pass None.
But answering Your question: You can make a proxy object. E.g:
class Proxy(object):
def __init__(self, request)
self.request = request
super(Proxy, self).__init__()
def get_messages(self):
# so some expensive things
return 'string'
# context processor
def context_processor(request):
return {'messages':Proxy(request)}
# in the view
{{ messages.get_messages }}
You can make this ever more generic, and create Proxy class that has one method (e.g get), and takes one parameter in constructor: a function which takes request object as first parameter. This way You gain generic method to proxy a function call in Your templates. Here it is:
class Proxy(object):
def __init__(self, request, function)
self.request = request
self.function = function
super(Proxy, self).__init__()
def get(self):
return self.function(self.request)
then You can write even cooler than I had written before:
# context processor
def context_processor(request):
return {'messages':Proxy(request, get_messages)}
# sounds nice to me
{{ messages.get }}