I'm fairly new to unit testing and we are actually attempting to use it on a project. There is a property like this.
public TimeSpan CountDown
{
get
{
return _countDown;
}
set
{
long fraction = value.Ticks % 10000000;
value -= TimeSpan.FromTicks(fraction);
if(fraction > 5000000)
value += TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1);
if(_countDown != value)
{
_countDown = value;
NotifyChanged("CountDown");
}
}
}
My test looks like this.
[TestMethod]
public void CountDownTest_GetSet_PropChangedShouldFire()
{
ManualRafflePresenter target = new ManualRafflePresenter();
bool fired = false;
string name = null;
target.PropertyChanged += new PropertyChangedEventHandler((o, a) =>
{
fired = true;
name = a.PropertyName;
});
TimeSpan expected = new TimeSpan(0, 1, 25);
TimeSpan actual;
target.CountDown = expected;
actual = target.CountDown;
Assert.AreEqual(expected, actual);
Assert.IsTrue(fired);
Assert.AreEqual("CountDown", name);
}
The question is how do I test the code in the setter? Do I break it out into a method? If I do it would probably be private since no one else needs to use this. But they say not to test private methods. Do make a class if this is the only case? would two uses of this code make a class worthwhile? What is wrong with this code from a design standpoint. What is correct?
The way you've got is fine (call the setter and then check the get returns the expected value).
Make sure you choose a selection of test values that exercise all the paths in that setter. A single set/get test isn't sufficient coverage.
Related
I am trying to verify that .shuffled() on a list is called, but get an error on running because of a prior .take(6) call on the list, and I cannot see a way around this.
Here is some code that gets the same error:
val mockList =
mockk<List<String>> { every { shuffled() } returns mockk(relaxed = true) }
val choiceList = spyk(listOf("String1", "String2")) { every { take(6) } returns mockList }
val tmp = choiceList.take(6)
val tmp2 = tmp.shuffled()
verify {mockList.shuffled())
On line 4, I get the following error:
class io.mockk.renamed.java.util.List$Subclass0 cannot be cast to class java.lang.Integer (io.mockk.renamed.java.util.List$Subclass0 is in unnamed module of loader 'app'; java.lang.Integer is in module java.base of loader 'bootstrap')
Attempting to go around by directly verifying on choiceList.take(6).shuffled() and combining the two tmp vals into one has had no success, as it gets true whether or not .shuffled() gets called. Also, switching from a spy to a mock for choiceList has also not worked.
Edit: Note, since this is a toy example, the take() is completely necessary, and cannot be removed, as it has real use in the actual code.
Interesting one!
I think in current implementation it is not possible. The easy answer would be "this test misses the declaration of wrapping static class" (as extension methods are just the same as java static methods for JVM). But if we add it...
#Test
fun test() {
mockkStatic("kotlin.reflect.jvm.internal.impl.utils.CollectionsKt")
val iterClass = mockkClass(Iterable::class)
val mockList = mockk<List<String>> { every { shuffled() } returns mockk(relaxed = true) }
with(iterClass) {
every { take(6) } returns mockList
val tmp = take(6)
val tmp2 = tmp.shuffled()
verify {
mockList.shuffled()
}
}
}
we have a Recursion detected in a lazy value under LockBasedStorageManager#1d2ad266 (DeserializationComponentsForJava.ModuleData) which is understandable - we just mocked the whole extensions package. And it is not possible to mock only one extension method leaving others intact. (source: https://github.com/mockk/mockk#extension-functions)
However, I'd do the following. Why not make our own extension functions which call the original and mock those?
It would go like this:
Main.kt:
package root
...
fun <T> Iterable<T>.take(n: Int): Iterable<T> {
val m = Iterable<T>::take
return m.call(this)
}
fun <T> Iterable<T>.shuffled(): Iterable<T> {
val m = Iterable<T>::shuffled
return m.call(this)
}
Test.kt:
package root
...
#Test
fun test() {
// note this changed
mockkStatic("root.MainKt")
val iterClass = mockkClass(Iterable::class)
val mockList = mockk<List<String>> { every { shuffled() } returns mockk(relaxed = true) }
with(iterClass) {
every { take(6) } returns mockList
val tmp = take(6)
val tmp2 = tmp.shuffled()
verify {
mockList.shuffled()
}
}
}
The only downside here I think is that it's reflection (duh!) So, this can possibly affect performance and has the requirement to have implementation(kotlin("reflect")) in the dependencies (to use call()). If it is not feasible I think there's no clean solution.
val mockList: List<String> = mockk(relaxed = true)
mockList.shuffled()
verify { mockList.shuffled() }
This works for me. The problem is that take of choiceList cannot be mocked somehow. Is that really necessary?
apologized to post this question here but i am in problem suddenly because i need to write unit test code for action where i am not good.
i am bit familiar with asp.net mvc. before i never write unit test code for action rather i manually test the action. now i want to know the art of writing unit test code for my action. so i read couple of article on unit test but notice all article share very basic idea about to write unit test code for action method in mvc controller but i am not being able to write unit test code for my action. so here i am pasting my one sample controller and their actions. so anyone please share knowledge how to write unit test code for my action methods below. if possible discuss with code sample or good hint which enable to write unit test code in VS2013 and MVC version 5.
here is my code
public class StudentController : Controller
{
private StudentRepository _Studentdata;
private StateRepository _Statedata;
private CityRepository _Citydata;
public StudentController()
{
_Studentdata = new StudentRepository(System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["StudentDBContext"].ConnectionString);
_Statedata = new StateRepository(System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["StudentDBContext"].ConnectionString);
_Citydata = new CityRepository(System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["StudentDBContext"].ConnectionString);
//_Studentdata = new StudentRepository(System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["StudentSQLDBContext"].ConnectionString);
//_Statedata = new StateRepository(System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["StudentSQLDBContext"].ConnectionString);
//_Citydata = new CityRepository(System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["StudentSQLDBContext"].ConnectionString);
}
// GET: Stuent
public ActionResult List(StudentListViewModel oSVm)
{
if (Request.IsAjaxRequest())
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000); // just simulate delay of one second
StudentListViewModel SVm = new StudentListViewModel();
SVm.SetUpParams(oSVm);
SVm.Students = _Studentdata.GetStudents(oSVm.page, oSVm.PageSize, oSVm.sort, oSVm.sortdir).ToList();
SVm.States = _Statedata.GetAll().ToList();
SVm.Cities = _Citydata.GetAll().ToList();
SVm.RowCount = _Studentdata.DataCounter;
return View("ListStudents",SVm);
}
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult UpdateStudents(StudentListViewModel oSVm, string Action)
{
if (Request.IsAjaxRequest())
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000); // just simulate delay of one second
StudentListViewModel SVm = new StudentListViewModel();
SVm.SetUpParams(oSVm);
if (Action == "UPDATE")
{
SVm.Students = _Studentdata.SaveXML(new List<Student>(oSVm.Students).ToXml("Students"),
oSVm.page, oSVm.PageSize, oSVm.sort, oSVm.sortdir).ToList();
}
else if (Action == "DELETE")
{
SVm.Students = _Studentdata.Delete(oSVm.Students[0].ID,
oSVm.page, oSVm.PageSize, oSVm.sort, oSVm.sortdir).ToList();
}
SVm.States = _Statedata.GetAll().ToList();
SVm.Cities = _Citydata.GetAll().ToList();
SVm.RowCount = _Studentdata.DataCounter;
return PartialView("_StudentGrid", SVm);
}
[HttpPost]
public ActionResult RefreshStudents(StudentListViewModel oSVm)
{
if (Request.IsAjaxRequest())
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000); // just simulate delay of one second
StudentListViewModel SVm = new StudentListViewModel();
SVm.SetUpParams(oSVm);
SVm.Students = _Studentdata.GetStudents(oSVm.page, oSVm.PageSize, oSVm.sort, oSVm.sortdir).ToList();
SVm.States = _Statedata.GetAll().ToList();
SVm.Cities = _Citydata.GetAll().ToList();
SVm.RowCount = _Studentdata.DataCounter;
return PartialView("_StudentGrid", SVm);
}
[HttpGet]
public JsonResult GetCityName(int StateID)
{
if (Request.IsAjaxRequest())
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000); // just simulate delay of one second
return Json(new {CityList =_Citydata.GetCityByStateId(StateID)} , JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);
}
}
Thanks
I want to do unit testing for a Groovy script, used in Elasticsearch.
The script itself calculates a _score, based on 3 parameters and a given formula.
I want do program an automated unit test for that script, to verify its correctness.
Are there any tools available, which offer such functionality?
I've solved the problem by mocking/emulating Elasticsearch environment in a TestNG test, using Groovy "magic".
Given the following Groovy script, which should compute a custom score value based on parameters and the documents height.
es_compute_custom_score.groovy
h = doc['height']
if (h <= 50) {
// complex logic here ;-)
} else if (h < 1000) {
// more complex logic here ;-)
} else {
// even more complex logic here ;-)
}
_score = a * b + h
Then this unit test lets you walk the red/green/refactor TDD road...
es_compute_custom_scoreTest.groovy (assuming default Maven project layout)
import org.codehaus.groovy.control.CompilerConfiguration
import org.testng.annotations.BeforeMethod
import org.testng.annotations.DataProvider
import org.testng.annotations.Test
class es_compute_custom_scoreTest{
private static final String SCRIPT_UNDER_TEST = 'src/main/groovy/es_compute_custom_score.groovy'
private CompilerConfiguration compilerConfiguration
private Binding binding
#BeforeMethod
public void setUp() throws Exception {
compilerConfiguration = new CompilerConfiguration()
this.compilerConfiguration.scriptBaseClass = DocumentBaseClassMock.class.name
binding = new Binding()
}
#DataProvider
public Object[][] createTestData() {
List<Object[]> refdata = new ArrayList<>()
refdata.add([100, 50, 5042L])
refdata.add([200, 50, 10042L])
refdata.add([300, 50, 15042L])
return refdata
}
#Test(dataProvider = 'createTestData')
void 'calculate a custom document score, based on parameters a and b, and documents height'(Integer a, Integer b, Long expected_score) {
// given
binding.setVariable("a", a)
binding.setVariable("b", b)
binding.setVariable("doc", new MockDocument(42))
// when
evaluateScriptUnderTest(this.binding)
// then
long score = (long) this.binding.getVariable("_score")
assert score == expected_score
}
private void evaluateScriptUnderTest(Binding binding) {
GroovyShell gs = new GroovyShell(binding, compilerConfiguration)
gs.evaluate(new File(SCRIPT_UNDER_TEST));
}
}
class MockDocument {
long height;
MockDocument(long height) {
this.height = height
}
}
I have a mocked class with a property that has a get and set. My code under test calls the setter to assign a connection string value. My test code mocks the class that contains the property and I add MustBeCalled when I arrange the mock.
ViewModel Code:
public class ClientViewModel
{
private readonly IMgmtDataProvider dataProvider;
public ClientViewModel(IMgmtDataProvider dataProvider)
{
this.dataProvider = dataProvider;
}
private string clientConnectionString;
public string ClientConnectionString
{
get { return clientConnectionString; }
set
{
clientConnectionString = value;
if (dataProvider != null)
dataProvider.ClientConnectionString = value;
}
}
}
Test Code:
//Arrange
const string connectionString = "THIS IS MY CONNECTIONSTRING";
var mockedDataProvider = Mock.Create<IMgmtDataProvider>();
Mock.Arrange(() => mockedDataProvider.ClientConnectionString).MustBeCalled();
//Act
var testViewModel = new ClientViewModel(mockedDataProvider);
testViewModel.ClientConnectionString = connectionString;
//Assert
var callCount = Mock.GetTimesCalled(() => mockedDataProvider.ClientConnectinString);
Assert.IsTrue(callCount > 0);
my Mock.Arrange(...).MustBeCalled(); appears to be applied to the getter, not the setter. So, when I call Mock.GetTimesCalled(...), it returns 0. I need to apply the MustBeCalled to the setter instead of the getter. I want to assure the dataprovider's connectionstring is getting set when the viewmodel's connection string gets set. How do I tell JustMock to track how many times a mocked setter is called?
Setters are arranged using the Mock.ArrangeSet() method, like so:
Mock.ArrangeSet(() => mockedDataProvider.ClientConnectionString = Arg.AnyString).MustBeCalled();
....
Mock.Assert(mockedDataProvider); // assert all expectations on this mock
You can also use Mock.AssertSet() as an alternative to the ArrangeSet().MustBeCalled() combo.
And finally, there's the Mock.GetTimesSetCalled() method for getting the number of times that a setter was called.
Check out the documentation on property mocking for examples.
In the example below, I'm attempting to test that the notes text is changed. Is the Assert.AreEqual(note.Text, text); correct?
[TestMethod()]
public void CreateNoteTest_Pass()
{
HomeController target = new HomeController(); // TODO: Initialize to an appropriate value
var note = new NotePM();
string text = "This is my test note" + DateTime.Now;
note.Text = text;
int id = note.NoteId;
note.CreatedByUserName = Membership.GetUser("danielle").UserName;
ActionResult actual;
actual = target.Create(note);
Assert.AreNotEqual(id, note.NoteId);
Assert.IsInstanceOfType(actual, typeof(RedirectToRouteResult));
Assert.AreEqual(note.Text, text);
}
Here's one take on this:
[TestMethod()]
public void EnsureCreateNoteChangesNoteText()
{
string text = "This is my test note" + DateTime.Now;
var note = new NotePM()
{
Text = text;
CreatedByUserName = "danielle";
};
int id = note.NoteId;
ActionResult actual;
HomeController target = new HomeController();
actual = target.Create(note);
Assert.AreNotEqual(id, note.NoteId, "note.NoteID must be assigned by the controller");
Assert.IsInstanceOfType(actual, typeof(RedirectToRouteResult));
Assert.AreNotEqual(text, note.Text, "note.Text must be changed by the controller");
}
Assert.AreNotEqual() is used to check for inequality (and there is a string overload which does a value comparison)
With the asserts which take 2 values, these should be Assert.xxx(Expected, Actual) otherwise the failure message is inverted.
Unit tests should isolate the system under test as far as possible (HomeController in this example). If HomeController is dependent on asp.net Membership ideally, you should inject this to the controller in the constructor to ensure it can be mocked. This way you can ensure that the unit test runs without the need to prep database data, setup connections from the Unit Test runner, etc.