I try
#Test
public void testGetSingleUser() {
given().expect().
statusCode(200).contentType(ContentType.JSON).
body("_testingString", equalTo("got it")).when().
get("http://localhost:8080/getIt");
}
But always got this error message
java.lang.AssertionError : JSON path _testingString dosen't match.
Expected : "got it" got : [got it]
how to ignore "" and [] problem
Thanks
Note: This is untested code snippet but while looking at your error trace it may help you.
try
equalTo(Arrays.asList("got it"))
instead of
equalTo("got it")
When you receive a error saying, same like that:
JSON path total doesn't match.
Expected: 2000
Actual: <[2000]>
It means that your result(Actual:) is coming inside an array.
Hence, you should use a rest-assured-command(for example, hasItem) that verifies values 'inside an array'.
My code below illustrate a solution for this situation:
RestAssuredWebTestClient
.given()
.webTestClient(mockedWebClient)
.queryParam("cost", 1000)
.when()
.get(TEMPL_AGGREG_DATE)
.then()
.log()
.everything()
.statusCode(OK.value())
.body("_id", hasItem(project2.getStartDate()))
.body("total", hasItem((int)project2.getEstimatedCost()))
.body(matchesJsonSchemaInClasspath("contracts/aggregations/CostsGroupByStartDate.json"))
;
Related
While testing the pipeline I got this error even the error log shows that the objects are equal:
public void testGenerateUserPageViews() throws Exception{
final PCollection<SessionModel> input = p.apply(Create.of(SESSION_MODEL));
final PCollection<UserPageViews> output = input.apply(ParDo.of(new GenerateUserPageViews()));
PAssert.that(output).containsInAnyOrder(USER_PAGEVIEWS);
p.run().waitUntilFinish();
}
java.lang.AssertionError: ParDo(GenerateUserPageViews)/ParMultiDo(GenerateUserPageViews).output:
Expected: iterable over [<com.userprofile.models.UserPageViews#e1688b19>] in any order
but: Not matched: <com.userprofile.models.UserPageViews#e1688b19>
at org.apache.beam.sdk.testing.PAssert$PAssertionSite.capture(PAssert.java:174)
at org.apache.beam.sdk.testing.PAssert.that(PAssert.java:416)
at org.apache.beam.sdk.testing.PAssert.that(PAssert.java:408)
at
I would guess that com.userprofile.models.UserPageViews does not have a fully implemented equals or hashCode method.
The solution is that I replace String variable with "" value in place of null. But I still don't understand why the object reference are the same in both cases.
My code looks like below, can someone help on this?
cy.visit(ws.visitEl())
cy.get('firstName').type('Jyothi')
cy.get('lastName').type('Prasad')
cy.get('Work-email').type('123#gmail.com')
cy.get('JobTitle').select('CEO').should('be.visible')
cy.get('companyName').type('Google')
cy.get('signup-button').click()
Here, I need to write a code like if 'signup-button' is not enabled, I should find the error in the page like which field is throwing an error and so the test should not fail? So here if any field is not filled, it throws an error.
Please can anyone help on this?
you can do something like this:
cy.visit(ws.visitEl())
cy.get('firstName').type('Jyothi')
cy.get('lastName').type('Prasad')
cy.get('Work-email').type('123#gmail.com')
cy.get('JobTitle').select('CEO').should('be.visible')
cy.get('companyName').type('Google')
cy.get('signup-button').then(($btn) => {
if ($btn.is(":disabled")) { //disabled
cy.get('error selector').should('have.text', 'error text')
} else { //enabled
cy.wrap($btn).click()
}
})
I have a function get_type that returns a string given an int:
def get_type(integer)
types = [...]
return types[integer]
end
When testing with RSpec, I tried doing the following:
describe 'function' do
context 'on valid input'
let(:input){ 2 }
let(:type){ 'large' }
let(:result){ get_type input }
it{ expect(result).to eq(type) }
end
end
However, this gives the message:
function on valid input should eq "large"
without any mention to the input, thus sounding like the function should always return "large".
How should this message be changed to say something like:
function on valid input should eq type
or another meaningful message? I could name the it block:
it 'should have the correct type' do
expect(result).to eq(type)
end
but is there a nicer way to do this without essentially typing out the test twice?
I think the unhelpful message should be considered a smell - you're headed down a road where every test is just expect(result).to eq(expected) with a wall of let. To my mind this is overuse of let - I don't think you gain anything over
describe 'function' do
context 'on valid input' do
it{ expect(get_type(2)).to eq('large') }
end
end
Which would produce a more helpful failure message. I would keep let for when the expressions are more complex or when I can give them a better name (eg a hash of attributes called valid_attributes)
I recently asked for help to parse out Java error stacks from a group of log files and got a very nice solution at the link below (using awk).
Pull out Java error stacks from log files
I marked the question answered and after some debugging and studying I found a few potential issues and since they are unrelated to my initial question but rather due to my limited understanding of awk and regular expressions, I thought it might be better to ask a new question.
Here is the solution:
BEGIN{ OFS="," }
/[[:space:]]+*<Error / {
split("",n2v)
while ( match($0,/[^[:space:]]+="[^"]+/) ) {
name = value = substr($0,RSTART,RLENGTH)
sub(/=.*/,"",name)
sub(/^[^=]+="/,"",value)
$0 = substr($0,RSTART+RLENGTH)
n2v[name] = value
print name value
}
code = n2v["ErrorCode"]
desc[code] = n2v["ErrorDescription"]
count[code]++
if (!seen[code,FILENAME]++) {
fnames[code] = (code in fnames ? fnames[code] ", " : "") FILENAME
}
}
END {
print "Count", "ErrorCode", "ErrorDescription", "Files"
for (code in desc) {
print count[code], code, desc[code], fnames[code]
}
}
One issue I am having with it is that not all ErrorDescriptions are being captured. For example, this error description appears in the output of this script:
ErrorDescription="Database Error."
But this error description does not appear in the results (description copied from actual log file):
ErrorDescription="Operation not allowed for reason code "7" on table "SCHEMA.TABLE".. SQLCODE=-668, SQLSTATE=57016, DRIVER=4.13.127"
Nor does this one:
ErrorDescription="Cannot Find Person For Given Order."
It seems that most error descriptions are not being returned by this script but do exist in the log file. I don't see why some error descriptions would appear and some not. Does anyone have any ideas?
EDIT 1:
Here is a sample of the XML I am parsing:
<Errors>
<Error ErrorCode="ERR_0139"
ErrorDescription="Cannot Find Person For Given Order." ErrorMoreInfo="">
...
...
</Error>
</Errors>
The pattern in the script will not match your data:
/[[:space:]]+*<Error / {
Details:
The "+" tells it to match at least one space.
The space after "Error" tells it to match another space - but your data has no space before the "=".
The "<" is unnecessary (but not part of the problem).
This would be a better pattern:
/^[[:space:]]*ErrorDescription[[:space:]]*=[[:space:]]*".*"/
This regex would only match the error description.
ErrorDescription="(.+?)"
It uses a capturing group to remember your error description.
Demo here. (Tested against a combination of your edit and your previous question error log.)
I have lots of code blocks like:
try
{
...
}
catch(Exception123 &e)
{
...
}
I want to replace them with something like this:
MY_MACRO(try
{
...
})
catch(Exception123 &e)
{
...
}
Exception123 is key, only blocks catching that specific type should be identified. But the exception caught might not always be called e or exist at all. And the precise structure and formatting of the code-block isn't always the same... we might have try {.
Is it feasible to use regex in a Visual-Studio find-replace for this? I couldn't figure out how I would group/identify the main try block.
Ok. Sorry, I havn't saw the second part of your question :
I think there is the regex you want for search :
(try[\r\n]+{[^\}]+[\r\n]+)(})([\r\n]+catch\(Exception123)
And in replacement field :
MY_MACRO($1$2)$3