A hopefully simple question about AngularJS unit testing. I have a controller using a simple service (adapted from angular-seed project)
services.js:
angular.module('myApp.services', []).value('version', '0.1');
controllers.js:
function MyCtrl1($s, version) {
$s.version = version;
}
MyCtrl1.$inject = ["$scope","version"];
This works great im my app. However, I have trouble creating the controller in unit test frame work. I can't figure our how to inject 'version' service (or create instance) and pass it to $controller() factory - I assume that's what I want to do?! Here's the bare bones spec:
controllerSpec.js:
beforeEach(inject(function($rootScope, $controller) {
scope = $rootScope.$new();
// how about version service?
ctrl = $controller(MyCtrl1, {$scope: scope, /* version: <where from?> */});
}));
it('Version should be 0.1 ...', function() {
expect(scope.version).toBe('0.1');
});
Running the test harness yields:
>test.sh
... failed (3.00 ms): Error: Error: Unknown provider: versionProvider <- version
Error: Unknown provider: versionProvider <- version
I have tried various things with $injector/$provider and module() but to no avail. I'm sure the answer is simple, but I can't see it.
just add beforeEach(module('myApp.services')) to your describe block. This will load the services module with the "version" service into the test injector and that will make it available to your test.
Related
I've been following the guidelines here - https://docs.servicestack.net/testing
I'm trying to do unit testing rather than integration, just to cut down the level of mocking and other complexities.
Some of my services call some of my other services, via the recommended IServiceGateway API, e.g. Gateway.Send(MyRequest).
However when running tests i'm getting System.NotImplementedException: 'Unable to resolve service 'GetMyContentRequest''.
I've used container.RegisterAutoWired() which is the service that handles this request.
I'm not sure where to go next. I really don't want to have to start again setting up an integration test pattern.
You're likely going to continually run into issues if you try to execute Service Integrations as unit tests instead of Integration tests which would start in a verified valid state.
But for Gateway Requests, they're executed using an IServiceGateway which you can choose to override by implementing GetServiceGateway() in your custom AppHost with a custom implementation, or by registering an IServiceGatewayFactory or IServiceGateway in your IOC, here's the default implementation:
public virtual IServiceGateway GetServiceGateway(IRequest req)
{
if (req == null)
throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(req));
var factory = Container.TryResolve<IServiceGatewayFactory>();
return factory != null ? factory.GetServiceGateway(req)
: Container.TryResolve<IServiceGateway>()
?? new InProcessServiceGateway(req);
}
Based on the discussion in the answer by #mythz, this is my solution:
Use case like OP: Test the "main" service, and mock the "sub service", and like OP I'd want to do that with Unit test (so BasicAppHost), because it's quicker, and I believe it is easier to mock services that way (side note: for AppHost based integration test, SS will scan assemblies for (real) Services, so how to mock? Unregister from "container" and replace w. mock?).
Anyway, for the unit test:
My "main" service is using another service, via the IServiceGateway (which is the officially recommended way):
public MainDtoResponse Get(MainDto request) {
// do some stuff
var subResponse = Gateway.Send(new SubDto { /* params */ });
// do some stuff with subResponse
}
In my test setup:
appHost = new BasicAppHost().Init();
var mockGateway = new Mock<IServiceGateway>(); // using Moq
mockGateway.Setup(x => x.Send<SubDtoResponse>(It.IsAny<SubDto>()))
.Returns(new SubDtoResponse { /* ... */ });
container.Register(mockGateway.Object);
So the IServiceGateway must be mocked, and then the Send method is the important one. What I was doing wrong was to mock the service, when I should have mocked the Gateway.
Then call the main service (under test) in the normal fashion for a Unit Test, like in the docs:
var s = appHost.Container.Resolve<MainService>(); // must be populated in DI manually earlier in code
s.Get(new MainDto { /* ... */ })
PS: The mockGateway.Setup can be used inside each test, not necessarily in the OneTimeSetUp.
I have a function in angular 2 service which I would like to test.
service.ts
upload(){
let file = new Transfer();
file.upload(myfile).then( // my callback );
}
I would like to mock Transfer in my test using jasmine. I tried this in my
sevice.spec.ts
import { TransferMock as Transfer } from '../mocks/mocks' to mock it. But it is not working. This is how my test is instantiated .
describe('authentication service' , () => {
beforeEach(() => {
auth = new Service(<any>new HttpMock(), <any>new StorageMock())
});
it('initialize authentication',() => {
expect(auth).not.toEqual(null);
auth.upload('file'); //it fails here
});
})
edit
Transfer is not injected in the service. Only one function uses Transfer . So not injecting can reduce the initial loading time of the app i guess(would be happy to know other opinions) . So I would like to know if there is anyway to mock if its constructed this way ?
edit
Although I had accepted Martin's answer as it is the best practice, it has one issue which can happen when you use ionic-native plugins.If the plugin doesnt have browser support it can fail. In this case it happened when I inject it, with error FileTransfer is not defined . So I am back again, looking for suggestions.
In order to provide a mock for a class in a test, you need to inject the class in your implementation.
In your ngModule add Transfer to your providers. Then simply inject it into your service.
Then in your test you can use { provide: Transfer, useClass: TransferMock } in your TestBed providers.
Update
The primary purpose of Dependency Injection is to make code testable and to allow mocking - faking - stubbing of services.
Update
With Dependancy Injection you can configure a different set of providers for different environments.
For example, if you are running your application in the browser, and in a native mobile environment you can swap out your configuration.
In your module you could have something like this:
const TRANSFER_PROVIDER: any;
if (environment.browser) {
TRANSFER_PROVIDER = Transfer;
} else {
TRANSFER_PROVIDER = { provide: Transfer, useClass: NativeTransfer }
}
...
providers: [ TRANSFER_PROVIDER ]
NativeTransfer could be a simple stub that does nothing but prevent errors, or it could let the user know that this feature is not supported in their browser.
I have been trying to configure offline unit tests for polymer web components that use the latest release of Firebase distributed database. Some of my tests are passing, but others—that look nigh identical to passing ones—are not running properly.
I have set up a project on github that demonstrates my configuration, and I'll provide some more commentary below.
Sample:
https://github.com/doctor-g/wct-firebase-demo
In that project, there are two suites of tests that work fine. The simplest is offline-test, which doesn't use web components at all. It simply shows that it's possible to use the firebase database's offline mode to run some unit tests. The heart of this trick is the in the suiteSetup method shown below—a trick I picked up from nfarina's work on firebase-server.
suiteSetup(function() {
app = firebase.initializeApp({
apiKey: 'fake',
authDomain: 'fake',
databaseURL: 'https://fakeserver.firebaseio.com',
storageBucket: 'fake'
});
db = app.database();
db.goOffline();
});
All the tests in offline-test pass.
The next suite is wct-firebase-demo-app_test.html, which test the eponymous web component. This suite contains a series of unit tests that are set up like offline-test and that pass. Following the idea of dependency injection, the wct-firebase-demo-app component has a database attribute into which is passed the firebase database reference, and this is used to make all the firebase calls. Here's an example from the suite:
test('offline set string from web component attribute', function(done) {
element.database = db;
element.database.ref('foo').set('bar');
element.database.ref('foo').once('value', function(snapshot) {
assert.equal(snapshot.val(), 'bar');
done();
});
});
I have some very simple methods in the component as well, in my attempt to triangulate toward the broken pieces I'll talk about in a moment. Suffice it to say that this test passes:
test('offline push string from web component function', function(done) {
element.database = db;
let resultRef = element.pushIt('foo', 'bar');
element.database.ref('foo').once('value', function(snapshot) {
assert.equal(snapshot.val()[resultRef.key], 'bar');
done();
});
});
and is backed by this implementation in wct-firebase-demo-app:
pushIt: function(at, value) {
return this.database.ref(at).push(value);
},
Once again, these all pass. Now we get to the real quandary. There's a suite of tests for another element, x-element, which has a method pushData:
pushData: function(at, data) {
this.database.ref(at).push(data);
}
The test for this method is the only test in its suite:
test('pushData has an effect', function(done) {
element.database = db;
element.pushData('foo', 'xyz');
db.ref('foo').once('value', function(snapshot) {
expect(snapshot.val()).not.to.be.empty;
done();
});
});
This test does not pass. While this test is running, the console comes up with an error message:
Your API key is invalid, please check you have copied it correctly.
By setting some breakpoints and walking through the execution, it seems to me that this error comes up after the call to once but before the callback is triggered. Note, again, this doesn't happen with the same test structure described above that's in wct-firebase-demo-app.
That's where I'm stuck. Why do offline-test and wct-firebase-demo-app_test suites work fine, but I get this API key error in x-element_test? The only other clue I have is that if I copy in a valid API key into my initializeApp configuration, then I get a test timeout instead.
UPDATE:
Here is a (patched-together) image of my console log when running the tests.:
To illustrate the issue brought up by tony19 below, here's the console log with just pushData has an effect in x-element_test commented out:
The offline-test results are apparently false positives. If you check the Chrome console, offline-test actually throws the same error:
The error doesn't affect the test results most likely because the API key validation occurs asynchronously after the test has already completed. If you could somehow hook into that validation, you'd be able to to catch the error in your tests.
Commenting out all tests except for offline firebase is ok shows the error still occurring, which points to suiteSetup(). Narrowing the problem down further by commenting 2 of the 3 function calls in the setup, we'll see the error is caused by the call to firebase.initializeApp() (and not necessarily related to once() as you had suspected).
One workaround to consider is wrapping the Firebase library in a class/interface, and mocking that for unit tests.
We are currently using CodeCeption to do some acceptance testing, but I would like to also add unit testing to the current setup.
Has anyone done Unit testing in Zend Framework 2 project using CodeCeption? And if so, how did you set up the environment?
Found this in codeception docs: http://codeception.com/docs/modules/ZF2
There is an example in this github project: https://github.com/Danielss89/zf2-codeception
I solved this problem by using PHPUnit. I followed the Zend PHPUnit guide, http://framework.zend.com/manual/current/en/tutorials/unittesting.html, which only got me so far. But, I was able to bootstrap Zend using a phpunit.xml file and pointing that to _bootstrap.php. Codeception is also able to bootstrap my tests using the _bootstrap.php file. So, now I can run my tests using both:
phpunit --bootstrap tests/unit/_bootstrap.php
and
php vendor/bin/codecept run unit
I was surprised to see how few examples there are for this. I was writing tests for a job queue client. Here is a bit of my test:
protected function setUp()
{
$this->serviceManager = new ServiceManager(new ServiceManagerConfig());
$config = Bootstrap::getConfig();
$this->serviceManager->setService('ApplicationConfig', $config);
$this->serviceManager->get('ModuleManager')->loadModules();
$this->client = $this->serviceManager->get('jobclient');
$this->client->addServers(array(array('ip' => '127.0.0.1', 'port' => '666')));
}
public function testServiceCreateSuccess() {
$this->client->setQueue($this->testData['queue']);
$this->assertEquals($this->client->getQueue(), $this->testData['queue'], 'We get the expected queue');
}
I mocked the job client and had a local config. My _bootstrap.php file looks basically the same as the Zend example except that I am using factories defined in the service config to manage some objects. So, I performed the "setService" method in the test setup rather then in the bootsrap init.
I have a module that contains resources for a project, and the code looks like this:
editor_services.js
var editorServices = angular.module('editorServices', ['ngResource']);
editorServices.factory('Project', ['$resource', '$http',function($resource, $http){
//...etc
now I would like to write tests for a controller that expects a project resource as an argument. How can I get an instance of the project resource that is created by this factory out of the editorServices variable?
Here is a working example how one would test Resources (or http) in angular
http://plnkr.co/edit/kK5fDFIVpyZTInH1c6Vh?p=preview
The basic setup is:
load angular-mocks.js in your test. This replaces the $httpBackend with mock version. See: http://docs.angularjs.org/api/ngMock.$httpBackend
In your test call $httpBackend.expect() to create expectation to be mocked out.
When you want to simulate server response call $httpBackend.flush()
There is a caveat that normal .toEqual() from jasmine dose not work with $resource so you have to create custom matcher like so:
beforeEach(function() {
this.addMatchers({
// we need to use toEqualData because the Resource hase extra properties
// which make simple .toEqual not work.
toEqualData: function(expect) {
return angular.equals(expect, this.actual);
}
});
});