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)
Related
I am calling a method "get_text" on GText.buffer detailed here http://oandrieu.nerim.net/ocaml/lablgtk/doc/GText.buffer.html
let text = textView#buffer#get_text in
However as get_text returns multiple values, when I try to use my variable "text" as a string, for example
textView2#buffer#set_text text;
I get the following error message:
Error: This expression has type
?start:GText.iter ->
?stop:GText.iter -> ?slice:bool -> ?visible:bool -> unit -> string
but an expression was expected of type string
How can I access the string being returned by the method? In general, how can I separate the multiple values returned by a method so I can access and use them individually?
I just looked up your link to lablgtk - it looks like you are missing the ():
let text = textView#buffer#get_text () in ...
The problem with this kind of error is that you are using a (curried) function where a string is required, and the message about the type error sounds kind of "long winded" and not to the point.
I have created rspec tests for my scopes (scope1, scope2 and scope3) and they pass as expected but I would also like to add some tests for a class method that I have which is what is actually called from my controller (the controller calls the scopes indirectly via this class method):
def self.my_class_method(arg1, arg2)
scoped = self.all
if arg1.present?
scoped = scoped.scope1(arg1)
end
if arg2.present?
scoped = scoped.scope2(arg2)
elsif arg1.present?
scoped = scoped.scope3(arg1)
end
scoped
end
It seems a bit redundant to run the same scope tests for each scenario in this class method when I know they already pass so I assume I really only need to ensure that different scopes are called/applied dependant on the args being passed into this class method.
Can someone advise on what this rspec test would look like.
I thought it might be something along the lines of
expect_any_instance_of(MyModel.my_class_method(arg1, nil)).to receive(:scope1).with(arg1, nil)
but that doesn't work.
I would also appreciate confirmation that this is all that's necessary to test in this situation when I've already tested the scopes anyway would be reassurring.
The Rspec code you wrote is really testing the internal implementation of your method. You should test that the method returns what you want it to return given the arguments, not that it does it in a certain way. That way, your tests will be less brittle. For example if you change what scope1 is called, you won't have to rewrite your my_class_method tests.
I would do that by creating a number of instances of the class and then call the method with various arguments and check that the results are what you expect.
I don't know what scope1 and scope2 do, so I made an example where the arguments are a name attribute for you model and the scope methods simply retrieve all models except those with that name. Obviously, whatever your real arguments and scope methods do you should put that in your tests, and you should modify the expected results accordingly.
I used the to_ary method for the expected results since the self.all call actually returns an ActiveRecord association and therefore wouldn't otherwise match the expected array. You could probably use includes and does_not_includes instead of eq, but perhaps you care about the order or something.
describe MyModel do
describe ".my_class_method" do
# Could be helpful to use FactoryGirl here
# Also note the bang (!) version of let
let!(:my_model_1) { MyModel.create(name: "alex") }
let!(:my_model_2) { MyModel.create(name: "bob") }
let!(:my_model_3) { MyModel.create(name: "chris") }
context "with nil arguments" do
let(:arg1) { nil }
let(:arg2) { nil }
it "returns all" do
expected = [my_model_1, my_model_2, my_model_3]
expect_my_class_method_to_return expected
end
end
context "with a first argument equal to a model's name" do
let(:arg1) { my_model_1.name }
let(:arg2) { nil }
it "returns all except models with name matching the argument" do
expected = [my_model_2, my_model_3]
expect_my_class_method_to_return expected
end
context "with a second argument equal to another model's name" do
let(:arg1) { my_model_1.name }
let(:arg2) { my_model_2.name }
it "returns all except models with name matching either argument" do
expected = [my_model_3]
expect_my_class_method_to_return expected
end
end
end
end
private
def expect_my_class_method_to_return(expected)
actual = described_class.my_class_method(arg1, arg2).to_ary
expect(actual).to eq expected
end
end
I'm trying to fix the following VBA statement (converting some old code just for fun and to learn Roslyn, not at all looking for anything perfect) to remove the Set keyword so it's a valid VB.NET statement:
Set f = New Foo()
When I look at it through the Syntax Visualizer, I see it turns into trailing trivia.
I'm trying to figure out how to find it using a query. I tried several approaches but all of the following came up empty:
var attempt1 = root.DescendantTokens().Where(t=>t.IsKind(SyntaxKind.SkippedTokensTrivia));
var attempt2 = root.DescendantTokens().Where(t => t.IsKind(SyntaxKind.SetKeyword));
var attempt3 = root.DescendantTrivia().Where(t => t.IsKind(SyntaxKind.SetKeyword));
var attempt4 = root.DescendantNodes()
.OfType<EmptyStatementSyntax>()
.Where(e => e.DescendantTokens().Any(t => t.IsKeyword()));
(Yes, I'm using C# to work with a VisualBasicSyntaxTree)
I can't seem to just find the SetKeyword token that appears in the visualizer, so I thought maybe it's doing some more heavy lifting to piece together what it really is (is that what's meant by structured trivia?). I read something in the documentation that mentioned the compiler can choose to represent it a couple of different ways, so I thought that may be what's going on here.
The query was just the first thing I tried, but in reality I have a SyntaxRewriter I'm using to visit the code to find and fix all such problems (I'm already able to fix missing parentheses around ArgumentLists, for example) but in this case I can't seem to figure out which Visit method to override.
So again, 1) how to query for these from the root and 2) the best override to select from a rewriter. I've been beating my face on the keyboard for two days on this which exponentially increases the likelihood that I'm having a cranio/recto-insertion moment and I need one of you kind souls to pull me out of it.
Cheers!
Brian
Edit: Fixed typo in query attempt1
So it appears that when the compiler reaches an error condition, it will skip all tokens up to the next point where it can recover and continue parsing (the end of the line in this case). The node representing this error condition is an EmptyStatement with trailing syntax trivia containing the rest of the text as parsed tokens.
So if you're going to rewrite a node, you'll want to rewrite EmptyStatements. But you don't want to write just any empty statement, just the ones with the "BC30807" diagnostic code.
public override SyntaxNode VisitEmptyStatement(EmptyStatementSyntax node)
{
var diagnostic = GetLetSetDiagnostic(node);
if (diagnostic == null)
return base.VisitEmptyStatement(node);
return RewriteLetSetStatement(node);
}
private Diagnostic GetLetSetDiagnostic(EmptyStatementSyntax node)
{
//'Let' and 'Set' assignment statements are no longer supported.
const string code = "BC30807";
return node.GetDiagnostics().SingleOrDefault(n => n.Id == code);
}
The implementation of the RewriteLetSetStatement() method is a bit of a mystery to me, I'm not sure how it can be implemented utilizing the compiler services effectively, I don't think that this is a use case that it covers well. The trivia retains the parsed tokens, but there's not much you can do with those tokens AFAIK.
Ideally, we'd just want to ignore the Set token from the tokens and throw it back into the parser to be reparsed. And as far as I can tell, that's not possible, we can only parse from text.
So, I guess the next best thing to do would be to take the text, rewrite it to remove the Set and parse the text again.
private SyntaxNode RewriteLetSetStatement(EmptyStatementSyntax node)
{
var letSetTokens = node.GetTrailingTrivia()
.Where(triv => triv.IsKind(SyntaxKind.SkippedTokensTrivia))
.SelectMany(triv => triv.GetStructure().ChildTokens())
.TakeWhile(tok => new[] {SyntaxKind.LetKeyword, SyntaxKind.SetKeyword}
.Contains(tok.VisualBasicKind()));
var span = new RelativeTextSpan(node.FullSpan);
var newText = node.GetText().WithChanges(
// replacement spans must be relative to the text
letSetTokens.Select(tok => new TextChange(span.GetSpan(tok.Span), ""))
);
return SyntaxFactory.ParseExecutableStatement(newText.ToString());
}
private class RelativeTextSpan(private TextSpan span)
{
public TextSpan GetSpan(TextSpan token)
{
return new TextSpan(token.Start - span.Start, token.Length);
}
}
I'm pretty new to scala and basically I want to have a couple of functions coupled to a string in a hashmap.
However I get an error at subscribers.get(e.key)(e.EventArgs); stating Option[EventArgs => Unit] does not take parameters...
Example code:
object Monitor {
val subscribers = HashMap.empty[String, (EventArgs) => Unit ]
def trigger(e : Event){
subscribers.get(e.key)(e.EventArgs);
}
def subscribe(key: String, e: (EventArgs) => Unit) {
subscribers += key -> e;
}
}
The get method of a Map gives you an Option of the value, not the value. Thus, if the key if found in the map, you get Some(value), if not, you get None. So you need to first "unroll" that option to make sure there is actually a value of a function which you can invoke (call apply on):
def trigger(e: Event): Unit =
subscribers.get(e.key).foreach(_.apply(e.EventArgs))
or
def trigger(e: Event): Unit =
subscribers.get(e.key) match {
case Some(value) => value(e.EventArgs)
case None =>
}
There are many posts around explaining Scala's Option type. For example this one or this one.
Also note Luigi's remark about using an immutable map (the default Map) with a var instead.
Since the get method returns Option, you can use 'map' on that:
subscribers.get(e.key).map(f => f(e.EventArgs))
or even shorter:
subscribers.get(e.key) map (_(e.EventArgs))
get only takes one argument. So subscribers.get(e.key) returns an Option, and you're trying to feed (e.EventArgs) to that Option's apply method (which doesn't exist).
Also, try making the subscribers a var (or choosing a mutable collection type). At the moment you have an immutable collection and an immutable variable, so your map cannot change. A more idiomatic way to declare it would be
var subscribers = Map[String, EventArgs => Unit]()
HashMap.get() in Scala works in a bit different way, than in Java. Instead of returning value itself, get() returns Option. Option is a special type, that can have 2 values - Some(x) and None. In first case it tells "there's some value with such a key in a map". In second case it tells "nope, there's nothing (none) for this key in a map". This is done to force programmers check whether map actually has an object or not and avoid NullPointerException, which appears so frequently in Java code.
So you need something like this:
def trigger(e: Event) {
val value = subscribers.get(e.key)
value match {
case None => throw new Exception("Oops, no such subscriber...")
case Some(f) => f(e.EventArgs)
}
}
You can find more info about Option type and pattern matching in Scala here.
I have been given the 3 functions below. Can anybody please help me to understand these? I am trying to port an application to C++ using Qt, but I don't understand these functions. So please help me!
Thanks in advance.
function 1:
def read_key
puts "read pemkey: \"#{#pkey}\"" if #verbose
File.open(#pkey, 'rb') do |io|
#key = OpenSSL::PKey::RSA.new(io)
end
end
function 2:
def generate_key
puts "generate pemkey to \"#{#pkey_o}\"" if #verbose
#key = OpenSSL::PKey::RSA.generate(KEY_SIZE)
# save key
File.open(#pkey_o, 'wb') do |file|
file << #key.export()
end
end
function 3:
def sign_zip
puts "sign zip" if #verbose
plain = nil
File.open(#zip, 'rb') do |file|
plain = file.read
end
#sig = #key.sign(OpenSSL::Digest::SHA1.new, plain)
end
There are probably two things about the above code that are confusing you, which if clarified, will help understand it.
First, #verbose and #key are instance variables, what a C++ programmer might call "member variables." The "if #verbose" following the puts statement literally means only do the puts if #verbose is true. #verbose never needs to be declared a bool--you just start using it. If it's never initialized, it's "nil" which evaluates to false.
Second, the do/end parts are code blocks. Many Ruby methods take a code block and execute it with a variable declared in those pipe characters. An example would be "array.each do |s| puts s; end" which might look like "for(int i = 0; i < array.size(); ++i) { s = array[i]; puts(s); }" in C++. For File.open, |io| is the file instance opened, and "read" is one of its methods.
These are all methods. #{#pkey_o} is string interpolation, substituting in the contents of an instance variable (called pkey_o; Ruby instance variables begin with # and class variables – unused here – begin with ##).
File.open(#pkey, 'rb') do |io|
#key = OpenSSL::PKey::RSA.new(io)
end
That opens the file whose name is stored in #pkey, stores the file handle in io (a block-local variable) and uses that with OpenSSL::PKey::RSA.new, whose result is stored in #key. Finally, it closes the file handle when the block is finished (at the end) whether or not it is a successful exit or an error case (in which case an exception would be thrown, but it would still be thrown). When translating this to C++, use of the RAII pattern is entirely reasonable (if you were going to Java, I'd say to use try/finally).