I am new to testing. I am using netbeans.
I have college assignment for junit testing but i am not so sure how should i test random number method.
My question is how should I test below method?
/**
* Method will generate a set of integers between the minimum and maximum of
* the requested size. If the uniqueElements is true the set will consist of
* unique integer values
*
* #param size the number of elements for the array
* #param minimum the lower value of the range of integers to generate
* #param maximum the upper value of the range of integers to generate
* #param uniqueElements flag for unique values
* #return
*/
public static ArrayList<Integer> createSet(int size, int minimum, int maximum, boolean uniqueElements) {
boolean filled = false;
int i = 0;
ArrayList<Integer> arraySet = null;
if (size > 0) {
arraySet = new ArrayList<Integer>();
boolean isUnique = false;
while (!filled) {
int randi = (int) (Math.random() * (maximum - minimum)) + minimum;
// C isu = true;
// C for (int j = 0; j < i && u; j++) {
// ** NEED &= isu = randi != A.get(j);
// C }
//
// if (isu || !u) {
// A.add(randi);
// i++;
// }
isUnique = true;
for (int j = 0; j < i && uniqueElements; j++) {
isUnique = randi != arraySet.get(j);
}
if (isUnique || !uniqueElements) {
arraySet.add(randi);
i++;
}
filled = (i == size);
}
}
return arraySet;
}
For this assignment professor told me that cover 100% code coverage.
I am not sure how should i Do that?
I created this test case
/**
* Test of createSet method, of class ArraySetUtilities.
*/
#Test(timeout = 5000)
public void testCreateSet() {
System.out.println("createSet");
int size = 0;
int minimum = 0;
int maximum = 0;
boolean uniqueElements = true;
ArrayList<Integer> expResult = null;
ArrayList<Integer> result = ArraySetUtilities.createSet(size, minimum, maximum, uniqueElements);
assertEquals(expResult, result);
}
Thank you in advance
As #flopshot said, you should have all the IFs cover. In order to do that you have to control the random number that your test is producing.
In order to do so I would recommend you would replace the Math.random() with SingletonRandom and use mock framework such as JMockit.
Changing your "production" code in order to be testable is something that has to be considered carefully, however, mocking random is good scenario for this.
You can create interface with random method and implement it twice stack exchange question, or create a class SingletonRandom and Mock it in your test. The same concept is described here mock singleton with jmockit.
public class SingletonRandom {
private SingletonRandom() {}
public static SingletonRandom newInstance() {
return new SingletonRandom();
}
public double getRandomNumber() {
return Math.random();
}
}
In your class do something like that
int randi = (int) (SingletonRandom.newInstance().random() * (maximum - minimum)) + minimum;
And in the test Mock the SingletonRandom
ClassTest {
#Mocked
SingletonRandom SingletonRandom;
#Test
testMethod() {
new Expectations() {{
SingletonGenerator.newInstance(); result = singletonGenerator;
singletonGenerator.getRandomNumber(); result = new double[] { 1.2, 2.5, 3.7 }; // Add the requested "random" numbers for your if casses
}};
// Add calls to method with assertion here
}
}
You can further read about Expectations here A Guide to JMockit Expectations
Related
I'm doing an Arduino project and I need to pass arrays with different sizes as parameter to my function.
The problem is that std::vector is not an option.
How can I do that?
The fallback is to pass a pointer to the first element in the array and the size:
void foo(int* arr, size_t size);
The reason for std::vector not being available on some platforms is that on some platforms dynamic allocations is a bad idea. However, once you are dynamically allocating arrays:
int* x = new int[42];
foo(arr,42); // array decays to pointer
delete[] x;
then you could as well use std::vector.
If std::vector is not available to you, then either search for an alternative (maybe this?) or write your own. The pointer + size approach is fragile and not recommended unless absolutely necessary. The power of std::vector is from the abstract concept to encapsulate the array, its size and capacity. Nobody can prevent you to apply that concept even if you cannot use std::vector.
In case you are talking about statically sized arrays, then thats not quite the use case for std::vector. You do not need dynamic allocation, and you can pass arrays by reference. I won't repeat here what you can find in this answer (std::array) or here (c-arrays).
Something like this should work
template<size_t N>
void DaFunction(std::array<int, N>& daArray)
you can do it without having to deal with memory allocation or pointers just by creating a string variable and a limited size array and then you start shifting
#include <Arduino.h>
class ArrayShifter
{
private:
// String Reservoire Tank
String _text;
// a fixed size array of 5 in my case (depending on the amount of data you expect)
String _viewPortArray[5];
int _size = 0;
// Methode to fill the array
bool shiftArray(int position);
public:
ArrayShifter(/* args */);
// Method that gets the text from Serial
String getSerialText();
// get data from the array
String getArrayData(int index);
// array size getter
int getSize();
//clear the array
void clearArray();
//remove item
void removeArrayItem(int index);
};
ArrayShifter::ArrayShifter(/* args */)
{
}
String ArrayShifter::getSerialText()
{
// lesteing to the serial and returning the value
_text = Serial.readString();
return _text;
}
bool ArrayShifter::shiftArray(int position)
{
/*Assuming that the data is comming separated with ";" for each row and ":" for each value
to optimize the size of array in this way :
name:value;age:value;gender:value;
*/
String text = getSerialText();
int index = 0;
_size = 0;
if (text.length() > 0) // text isn't empty
{
if (position <= 5) // if the data belongs to the first 5 range
{
for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
// get the index of our separator that we've chosed to be ";"
index = text.indexOf(";");
if (index > 0)
{
// index found
_size++;
// putting the value before ";" in the array
_viewPortArray[i] = text.substring(0, index);
// deleting the value from the tank
text = text.substring(index + 1);
}
}
}
else
{
_size = 0;
// to wich range the desired index belongs
unsigned int dataRange = ((position - position % 5));
int ghostIndex = 0;
// looping throught all ";" to get indexes
for (int i = 0; i < dataRange; i++)
{
ghostIndex = text.indexOf(";");
if (ghostIndex > 0)
{
_size++;
text = text.substring(ghostIndex + 1);
}
}
// grabing just 5 of the data
for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
if (ghostIndex > 0)
{
_size++;
_viewPortArray[i] = text.substring(0, ghostIndex);
text = text.substring(ghostIndex + 1);
}
// updating ghost index
ghostIndex = text.indexOf(';');
}
}
return true;
}
return false;
}
String ArrayShifter::getArrayData(int index)
{
// turn the roulette
if (shiftArray(index))
{
if (index <= 5)
{
// yes we have this
return _viewPortArray[index];
}
else
{
// but we have to put it in the range of 5
index = index - 5;
return _viewPortArray[index];
}
}
}
int ArrayShifter::getSize()
{
return _size;
}
void ArrayShifter::clearArray()
{
for(int i = 0 ; i <5 ; i ++)
{
_viewPortArray->remove(i);
_size = 0;
}
}
void ArrayShifter::removeArrayItem(int index)
{
_viewPortArray->remove(index);
_size--;
}
main class :
#include <Arduino.h>
#include <ArrayShifter.h>
ArrayShifter array;
void setup() {
// put your setup code here, to run once:
Serial.begin(9600);
while (!Serial){}
}
void loop() {
if(Serial.available()>0)
{
Serial.println(array.getArrayData(7));
int sizeOption2 = array.getSize();
Serial.println(sizeOption2);
array.removeArrayItem(7);
Serial.println(array.getArrayData(7));
}
}
please check my github repository
https://github.com/Riadam/ViewPort-Array-Shifter-for-Arduino-Uno.git
I am trying to code Conway's "Game of Life". While getting closer to my goal I got stuck with a compiler error:
C2338: The C++ Library doesen't provide a hash for this type.
At first I used the SFML class sf::Vector2D. When it failed to work for me I wrote a class of my own, hoping I could implement the missing hashCode method.
My question is:
Is it possible to uses my own class with its own hashCode method for std::unordered_map? I need to use a class, that can hold two numbers. (I also tried std::tuple, struct and stuff).
Here is one sheet of my code:
#include "GameMechanics.h"
GameMechanics::GameMechanics(Elements * elements):elements(elements)
{
this->refreshTime = 1000000; //ms
this->clock.restart();
}
GameMechanics::~GameMechanics()
{
}
bool GameMechanics::isRunning()
{
return this->running;
}
void GameMechanics::setRunning(bool running)
{
this->running = running;
}
void GameMechanics::loop()
{
unsigned passedTime = clock.getElapsedTime().asMicroseconds(); //check passed time since the clock got restarted
this->timeHeap += passedTime; //add passed time to the timeheap
this->clock.restart();
//only refresh every "refreshTime" seconds
if (timeHeap >= this->refreshTime) {
std::cout << "Calculated new generation!" << std::endl;
this->timeHeap -= this->refreshTime;
this->calculateNextGeneration();
}
}
void GameMechanics::calculateNextGeneration()
{
std::list<sf::Vector2i> oldGeneration = this->elements->getElements(); // population in the moment
sf::Vector2u elements = this->elements->getElementCount();
std::unordered_map<MyVector2D, int> counter; //here is the problem. Thats the line that makes some trouble
for (std::list<sf::Vector2i>::iterator it = oldGeneration.begin(); it != oldGeneration.end(); it++) {
sf::Vector2i position = *it;
for (int i = -1; i < 2; i++)
{
for (int j = -1; j < 2; j++)
{
if (position.x + i >= 0 && position.x + i <= this->elements->getElementCount().x &&
position.y + j >= 0 && position.y + j <= this->elements->getElementCount().y)
{
if (counter.find(MyVector2D(position.x + i, position.y + j)) != counter.end())
{
counter.at(MyVector2D(position.x + i, position.y + j))++;
}
else //if there is no such element, create a new entry
{
counter.insert({ MyVector2D(position.x + i, position.y + j),1 });
}
}
}
}
}
//create new generation
this->brithNewGeneration(&counter);
}
void GameMechanics::brithNewGeneration(std::unordered_map<MyVector2D,int>* counter)
{
//this methode does work
std::list<sf::Vector2i> newGeneration;
// for (std::unordered_map<MyVector2D, int>::iterator it = counter->begin(); it != counter->end(); it++)
{
//if life vell with < 2 neighbours, it dies
//life cell with 2 or 3 neighbours will continue living
//life cell with >4 cells will die
//dead cell with 3 neighbours will start living
}
}
The custom hashing function required for std::unordered_map (and std::unordered_set) is not a member function of the stored type. You need to specialize the std::hash template:
namespace std {
template<>
struct hash<YourType> {
using argument_type = YourType;
using result_type = std::size_t;
result_type operator()(argument_type const &obj) const {
// Compute and return the hash value for `obj`.
}
};
}
Your case is precisely the reason why it's done this way: you can specialize std::hash for sf::Vector2D if you wish, no need to implement your own class.
Hopefully someone can help me with this issue. I'm trying to couple an IEnumerator with my object pooling script to instantiate enemies in waves. But I can't get them to instantiate without immediately destroying themselves 2 or 3 times and then instantiating one wave of enemies and never spawning again. Can anyone help me see where I'm going wrong here?
using UnityEngine;
using System.Collections;
using System.Collections.Generic;
public class SpawnMaster : MonoBehaviour {
public int enemyCount = 4;
public float spawnWait=0.5f;
public float startWait=1;
public float waveWait=3;
public Transform[] spawnPoints;
private int currentWave = 0;
private int waveCount = 10;
private IEnumerator spawnWaves;
private IEnumerator goHorde;
bool isSpawning = false;
void Update()
{
if(!isSpawning)
{
isSpawning = true;
StartCoroutine(SpawnWaves(currentWave));
}
}
IEnumerator SpawnWaves (int currentWave)
{
Debug.Log("Spawning " + currentWave + "currentWave");
for (int i = 0; i < waveCount; i++)
{
StartCoroutine(GoHorde());
}
currentWave += 1;
yield return new WaitForSeconds (waveWait);
//We've spawned, so start another spawn
isSpawning = false;
}
IEnumerator GoHorde()
{
GameObject beetle01 = BeetlePool.current.GetPooledObject();
if(beetle01 == null)
yield return null;
// Only pick a new spawn point once per wave
int spawnPointIndex = Random.Range (0, spawnPoints.Length);
for (int j = 0; j < enemyCount; j++)
{
beetle01.transform.position = spawnPoints[spawnPointIndex].position;
beetle01.transform.rotation = spawnPoints[spawnPointIndex].rotation;
beetle01.SetActive(true);
yield return new WaitForSeconds (spawnWait);
}
}
}
I would change:
if(!isSpawning)
to:
if(isSpawning != true)
Or:
if(isSpawning == false)
Also if you are going to have multiple waves of enemies that are being instantiated and destroyed. You should look into object pooling to save memory.
There is a initial game difficulty which is
game_difficulty=5 //Initial
Every 3 times if you get it right, your difficulty goes up to infinity but every 3 times you get it wrong, your difficulty goes down but not below 5. So, in this code for ex:
if(user_words==words) win_count+=1;
else() incorrect_count+=1;
if(win_count%3==0) /*increase diff*/;
if(incorrect_count%3==0) /*decrease difficulty*/;
How should I go about doing this?
Simple answer:
if(incorrect_count%3==0) difficulty = max(difficulty-1, 5);
But personally I would wrap it up in a small class then you can contain all the logic and expand it as you go along, something such as:
class Difficulty
{
public:
Difficulty() {};
void AddWin()
{
m_IncorrectCount = 0; // reset because we got one right?
if (++m_WinCount % 3)
{
m_WinCount = 0;
++m_CurrentDifficulty;
}
}
void AddIncorrect()
{
m_WinCount = 0; // reset because we got one wrong?
if (++m_IncorrectCount >= 3 && m_CurrentDifficulty > 5)
{
m_IncorrectCount = 0;
--m_CurrentDifficulty;
}
}
int GetDifficulty()
{
return m_CurrentDifficulty;
}
private:
int m_CurrentDifficulty = 5;
int m_WinCount = 0;
int m_IncorrectCount = 0;
};
You could just add this as a condition:
if (user words==words) {
win_count += 1;
if (win_count %3 == 0) {
++diff;
}
} else {
incorrect_count += 1;
if (incorrect_count % 3 == 0 && diff > 5) {
--diff
}
}
For example:
if(win_count%3==0) difficulty++;
if(incorrect_count%3==0 && difficulty > 5) difficulty--;
This can be turned into a motivating example for custom data types.
Create a class which wraps the difficulty int as a private member variable, and in the public member functions make sure that the so-called contract is met. You will end up with a value which is always guaranteed to meet your specifications. Here is an example:
class Difficulty
{
public:
// initial values for a new Difficulty object:
Difficulty() :
right_answer_count(0),
wrong_answer_count(0),
value(5)
{}
// called when a right answer should be taken into account:
void GotItRight()
{
++right_answer_count;
if (right_answer_count == 3)
{
right_answer_count = 0;
++value;
}
}
// called when a wrong answer should be taken into account:
void GotItWrong()
{
++wrong_answer_count;
if (wrong_answer_count == 3)
{
wrong_answer_count = 0;
--value;
if (value < 5)
{
value = 5;
}
}
}
// returns the value itself
int Value() const
{
return value;
}
private:
int right_answer_count;
int wrong_answer_count;
int value;
};
And here is how you would use the class:
Difficulty game_difficulty;
// six right answers:
for (int count = 0; count < 6; ++count)
{
game_difficulty.GotItRight();
}
// check wrapped value:
std::cout << game_difficulty.Value() << "\n";
// three wrong answers:
for (int count = 0; count < 3; ++count)
{
game_difficulty.GotItWrong();
}
// check wrapped value:
std::cout << game_difficulty.Value() << "\n";
// one hundred wrong answers:
for (int count = 0; count < 100; ++count)
{
game_difficulty.GotItWrong();
}
// check wrapped value:
std::cout << game_difficulty.Value() << "\n";
Output:
7
6
5
Once you have a firm grasp on how such types are created and used, you can start to look into operator overloading so that the type can be used more like a real int, i.e. with +, - and so on.
How should I go about doing this?
You have marked this question as C++. IMHO the c++ way is to create a class encapsulating all your issues.
Perhaps something like:
class GameDifficulty
{
public:
GameDifficulty () :
game_difficulty (5), win_count(0), incorrect_count(0)
{}
~GameDifficulty () {}
void update(const T& words)
{
if(user words==words) win_count+=1;
else incorrect_count+=1;
// modify game_difficulty as you desire
if(win_count%3 == 0)
game_difficulty += 1 ; // increase diff no upper limit
if((incorrect_count%3 == 0) && (game_difficulty > 5))
game_difficulty -= 1; //decrease diff;
}
inline int gameDifficulty() { return (game_difficulty); }
// and any other access per needs of your game
private:
int game_difficulty;
int win_count;
int incorrect_count;
}
// note - not compiled or tested
usage would be:
// instantiate
GameDiffculty gameDifficulty;
// ...
// use update()
gameDifficulty.update(word);
// ...
// use access
gameDifficulty.gameDifficulty();
Advantage: encapsulation
This code is in one place, not polluting elsewhere in your code.
You can change these policies in this one place, with no impact to the rest of your code.
I'm trying to code a robot, and I'm having a confusing situation. I need to pass an array of pointers to objects to a constructor of a class. I can't, however, populate the array before I pass it into the constructor. To solve this I want to pass a pointer to said array, and access its elements from the pointer. The problem is that I'm new to C++, and so I'm not sure of the syntax. Could you guys help me out?
Code for the main file
class RobotDemo : public SimpleRobot
{
Joystick stick;
JoystickOne joyOne;
Victor *victors [8];
public:
RobotDemo(void):
stick(1),
joyOne(&stick)// these must be initialized in the same order
// as they are declared above.
/*It doesnt seem like I can do anything but initialize things here*/
{
/*Populate array with pointers to victors. Will need to update channels*/
for (int x = 1; x <= 7; x++) {
victors[x] = new Victor(x);
}
/*And I don't think I can initialize anything here*/
myRobot.SetExpiration(0.1);
}
/**
* Drive left & right motors for 2 seconds then stop
*/
void Autonomous(void)
{
}
/**
* Runs the motors with arcade steering.
*/
void OperatorControl(void)
{
myRobot.SetSafetyEnabled(true);
while (IsOperatorControl())
{
joyOne.testForActions(); /*Check joystick one for actions*/
Wait(0.005); // wait for a motor update time
}
}
/**
* Runs during test mode
*/
void Test() {
}
};
START_ROBOT_CLASS(RobotDemo);
Here's the code for the JoystickInput class, which the JoystickOne class extends
//the .h
#ifndef JOYSTICKINPUT_H
#define JOYSTICKINPUT_H
#include "WPILib.h"
class JoystickInput {
public:
JoystickInput(Joystick*);
JoystickInput(Joystick*, Victor* [8]);
Joystick * joystick;
bool buttons [10];
Victor** victors [8];
bool buttonClicked(int id);
virtual void testForActions();
};
#endif
//and the .cpp
#include "JoystickInput.h"
JoystickInput::JoystickInput(Joystick * joy) {
joystick = joy;
for (int x = 0; x < 10; x++) {
buttons[x] = false;
}
}
JoystickInput::JoystickInput(Joystick * joy, Victor* vicArray [8]) {
joystick = joy;
for (int x = 0; x < 10; x++) {
buttons[x] = false;
}
for (int n = 0; n <=7; n++) {
*victors[n] = vicArray[n];
}
}
bool JoystickInput::buttonClicked(int id) {
if (buttons[id] == false and joystick->GetRawButton(id) == true) {
buttons[id] = true;
return true;
} else if (buttons[id] == true and joystick->GetRawButton(id) == false) {
buttons[id] = false;
return false;
} else {
return false;
}
}
void JoystickInput::testForActions() {
}
What I'm asking you guys to help me do is rework the constructor of JoystickInput() so that it also takes a pointer to an array of pointers (to Victors), and performs methods on elements of the array. Googling it hasnt turned up anything useful. I'd research it more myself, but its been a few days and I'm still hung up on this.
Thanks for the help (and if not that, then at least reading my post)!
You should be able to use:
JoystickInput(Joystick*, Victor**, int);
and just pass vicArray into the constructor. If victors can be anything else than an array of length 8, then you should also pass the length as an argument because c++ cannot find the length of an array from a pointer.
Whenever types get complicated (functions or arrays), use a typedef:
typedef char char_buffer_type[8]; //char_buffer_type is an array
typedef char (*char_buffer_ptr)[8]; //char_buffer_ptr is a pointer to an array
typedef char (&char_buffer_ref)[8]; //char_buffer_ref is a reference to an array
typedef int main_type(int, char**); //main_type is a "int(int, char**)" function
typedef Victor*(array_of_ptr)[8]; //array_of_ptr is an array of 8 Victor*
Also, you should name the values 8 and 10.
class JoystickInput {
public:
static const int victor_count = 8;
static const int button_count = 10;
typedef Victor*(array_of_victor_ptr)[victor_count];
JoystickInput(Joystick*){}
JoystickInput(Joystick*, array_of_victor_ptr& vicArray);
bool buttonClicked(int id){return true;}
virtual void testForActions(){}
Joystick * joystick;
bool buttons [button_count];
array_of_victor_ptr victors; //that's simpler
};
//then pass this one by reference
JoystickInput::JoystickInput(Joystick * joy, array_of_victor_ptr& vicArray) {
joystick = joy;
for (int x = 0; x < button_count; x++) {
buttons[x] = false;
}
for (int n = 0; n < victor_count; n++) {
victors[n] = vicArray[n]; //don't have to dereference here anymore
}
}
Proof of compilation. Typedefs are wonderful. Use them.