Intellij's 'Creates missing switch branches' intention seems not to be working for me. I have enabled/disabled/enabled it with restarts of intellij, but I never get the alt-enter possibility to create a completed switch statement.
Am I missing something? I'm working with the latest version of intellij ultimate.
Here's an example that works :
class SwitchBranches {
public static final int ONE = 1;
public static final int TWO = 2;
public static final int THREE = 3;
void x(#MagicConstant(intValues = {ONE, TWO, THREE}) int i) {
switch (i) { // position the text caret on the `i` expression or on the switch keyword
}
}
}
If you need this functionality to create a switch statement for enum values, use the Enum 'switch' statement that misses case inspection. It is enabled by default at the "No highlighting, only fix" level. Example:
enum EnumExample {
A, B, C;
void x(EnumExample e) {
switch (e) {
}
}
}
Related
public enum SystemConstants
{
SystemTypeDocument,
ApplicationTypeDocument
}
public interface ISystemBaseObject
{
SystemConstants SystemType();
}
public class ExploreMockExample
{
ISystemBaseObject systemBaseObject;
public ExploreMockExample(ISystemBaseObject systemObject)
{
systemBaseObject = systemObject;
}
public int MethodToBeTested()
{
if (systemBaseObject.SystemType() == SystemConstants.SystemTypeDocument)
{
return 1;
}
else
{
return 2;
}
}
}
Using intellitest along with NUnit3.
When I right click MethodToBeTested, and then select run intellitest, expected outcome is Intellitest test should achieve maximum code coverage and create test case with valid test data to cover both if (systemBaseObject.SystemType() == SystemConstants.SystemTypeDocument) and else branch statement.
Some blogs suggested to create factory for class and create mock object of interface. And use PexChoose static method to allow pex framework to explore code to achieve maximum code coverage.
[PexFactoryMethod(typeof(ExploreMockExample))]
public static ExploreMockExample CreateMock()
{
var mockComosBaseObject = new Mock<ISystemBaseObject>();
mockComosBaseObject.Setup(c =>c.SystemType()).
Returns(PexChoose.EnumValue<SystemConstants>(nameof(SystemConstants)));
return new ExploreMockExample(mockComosBaseObject.Object);
}
With above setup, Intellitest could above to generate only one test case which is covering if statement, if (systemBaseObject.SystemType() == SystemConstants.SystemTypeDocument).
What can be done, to allow intellitest to create test case which will cover else statement having result value as 2.
Create mock implementation for your interface. Like mentioned below,
public class SystemBaseObject : ISystemBaseObject
{
public SystemConstants SystemType()
{
return PexChoose.EnumValue<SystemConstants>("SystemConstants");
}
}
PexChoose will help intellitest to explore code, return value will depend upon uses of SystemConstants in original class.
Then, create factory of ExploreMockExample using SystemBaseObject,
[PexFactoryMethod(typeof(ExploreMockExample))]
public static ExploreMockExample Create()
{
return new ExploreMockExample(new SystemBaseObject());
}
Run Intellitest on actual method MethodToBeTested, Intellitest will create 2 unit test case to cover both if else branch statement.
First test case,
[PexGeneratedBy(typeof(ExploreMockExampleTest))]
public void MethodToBeTested806()
{
ExploreMockExample exploreMockExample;
int i;
exploreMockExample = ExploreMockExampleFactory.Create();
i = this.MethodToBeTested(exploreMockExample);
PexAssert.AreEqual<int>(1, i);
PexAssert.IsNotNull((object)exploreMockExample);
}
Kindly observe PexAssert.AreEqual(1, i), which will cover if branch.
Second test case,
[PexGeneratedBy(typeof(ExploreMockExampleTest))]
public void MethodToBeTested792()
{
ExploreMockExample exploreMockExample;
int i;
exploreMockExample = ExploreMockExampleFactory.Create();
IPexChoiceRecorder choices = PexChoose.Replay.Setup();
choices.NextSegment(1).DefaultSession
.At(0, "SystemConstants", (object)(SystemConstants.ApplicationTypeDocument));
i = this.MethodToBeTested(exploreMockExample);
PexAssert.AreEqual<int>(2, i);
PexAssert.IsNotNull((object)exploreMockExample);
}
Kindly observe PexAssert.AreEqual(2, i), which will cover else branch.
Using PexChoose.Replay.Setup() it will return IPexChoiceRecorder, and it will make choice about to have SystemConstants.ApplicationTypeDocument as argument value to cover else block.
I would like to repeatedly enter a number that is added to a linked list.
But there's an error in the code at line x = new Node():
No enclosing instance of type Main is accessible. Must qualify the allocation with an enclosing instance of type Main (e.g. x.new A() where x is an instance of Main).
Is there a way to fix my code?
static Node head;
static Node p;
static Node q;
static Node x;
class Node {
int data;
Node next;
public Node link;
// Constructor to create a new node
// Next is by default initialized
// as null
Node(int d) {
data = d;
next = null;
}
public Node() {
// TODO Auto-generated constructor stub
}
}
Two issues:
class Node should either be declared as static, or be moved to a separate file.
p = x should happen outside the else block, since it should get this value also when the if condition was true:
if(head == null) {
head = x;
} else {
p.link = x;
}
p = x;
Some remarks:
If you really want to use the Node constructor without arguments, then it is better to define explicitly what the new Node's properties should be:
public Node() {
data = 0;
next = null;
}
However, it would be better to not have this constructor signature at all, and only construct the object using the data as argument:
if(num != -999){
x = new Node(num);
...and now you don't need to do any of this any more:
x.data = num;
x.link = null;
The inner Node class is not static, meaning it belongs to a specific instance of the enclosing Main class. Since it doesn't refer to any instance methods this seems like it was not done intentionally. Make the class itself static (i.e., static class Node {) and you should be fine.
First, the class Node cannot be referenced from a static context. To fix this, make it static or move it to its own file. Second, the null pointer exception happens since you don't assign p in the special case where the list is empty.
Overall, I suggest that you clean up your class and use a more structured approach. Rename p to last to make it clear that this is a reference to the last element of the list. Move the functionality to add a node into its own method to make the code more readable. Use next in the Node class to point to the next node instead of link. Create an instance of the class where your head and last reference is defined and make them private. Use break inside the loop to only define the magic number (-999) once and exit the loop when it is entered.
The whole class could look like this:
public class CustomLinkedList {
private Node head = null;
private Node last = null;
static class Node {
int data;
Node next = null;
}
public void add(int num) {
Node x = new Node();
x.data = num;
if (this.head == null) {
this.head = x;
} else {
this.last.next = x;
}
this.last = x;
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
CustomLinkedList list = new CustomLinkedList();
int count = 0;
do {
try {
BufferedReader dataIn = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(System.in));
System.out.print("Enter number " + (++count) + ": ");
String strNum = dataIn.readLine();
int num = Integer.parseInt(strNum);
if (num != -999) {
list.add(num);
} else {
break; // exit loop
}
} catch (IOException e) {
System.out.print(e.getMessage());
}
} while (true);
}
}
We have several cucumber step definitions that are modifying the database which would mess up the test afterwards if it doesn't get cleaned up after the test runs. We do this by having a function with the #After annotation that will clean things up.
The problem is that if there's a failure in one of the tests, the function with #After doesn't run, which leaves the database in a bad state.
So the question is, how can I make sure the function with #After always runs, regardless if a test failed or not?
I saw this question, but it's not exactly what I'm trying to do, and the answers don't help.
If it helps, here is part of one of the tests. It's been greatly stripped down, but it has what I think are the important parts.
import static org.hamcrest.MatcherAssert.assertThat;
import cucumber.api.java.After;
public class RunMacroGMUStepDefinition
{
#Autowired
protected ClientSOAPRecordkeeperInterface keeper;
#Given( "^the following Macro exists:$" )
#Transactional
public void establishDefaultPatron( final DataTable dataTable )
{
for ( final DataTableRow dataTableRow : dataTable.getGherkinRows() )
{
// Stuff happens here
keeper.insert( macroScriptRecord );
}
}
#After( value = "#RunMacroGMU" )
#Transactional
public void teardown()
{
for ( int i = 0; i < macroScripts.size(); i++ )
{
keeper.delete( macroScripts.get( i ) );
}
}
// Part of #Then
private void compareRecords( final String has, // Other stuff )
{
// Stuff happens here
if ( has.equals( "include" ) )
{
assertThat( "No matching data found", foundMatch, equalTo( true ) );
}
else
{
assertThat( "Found matching data", foundMatch, equalTo( false ) );
}
}
}
I personally use Behat (The PHP dist of Cucumber), and we use something like this to take screenshots after a failed test. Did a bit of searching, and found this snippet in Java, that may help with this situation.
#After
public void tearDown(Scenario scenario) {
if (scenario.isFailed()) {
(INSERT FUNCTIONS YOU WOULD LIKE TO RUN AFTER A FAILING TEST HERE)
}
driver.close();
}
I hope this helps.
When I debug an app, in the debug tool window there is a Watches window. I have read this manual over and over, but cannot find any practicle usage of Watches.
Somehow, I think this is a cool and useful tool and I lack from not using it.
Can someone explain when should I use it and give a few samples? Ideally, the description will be bound to a concrete (imaginary) situation so that I better apply it in my work.
This section allows you to define expressions which you'd like to see how they evolve/change with every step of your debug process, without manually inspecting all the available objects and their properties. Let's take the following simple sample which intentionally throws a NullPointerException (NPE):
public class WatchSample {
static class Student {
public static final int CREDITS_REQUIRED_FOR_GRADUATION = 10;
private String name;
private Integer credits;
public Student(String name, Integer credits) {
this.name = name;
this.credits = credits;
}
String getName() {
return name;
}
public boolean hasGraduated() {
return credits >= CREDITS_REQUIRED_FOR_GRADUATION;
}
public Integer getCredits() {
return credits;
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
List<Student> students = simulateReadingFromDB();
for (Student student : students) {
if (student.hasGraduated()) {
System.out.println("Student [" + student.getName() + "] has graduated with [" + student.getCredits() + "] credits");
}
}
}
private static List<Student> simulateReadingFromDB() {
List<Student> students = new ArrayList<>(3);
students.add(new Student("S1", 15));
students.add(new Student("S2", null)); // <- simulate some mistake
students.add(new Student("S3", 10));
return students;
}
}
At some point in time you may wonder how come you get a NPE and what needs fixing. So just set a breakpoint, add a few watches and carefully step through the lines. Eventually you'll end up with the troublemaker in sight:
Of course this is a basic example and should be taken as such. Within a regular app you'll probably have more complex scenarios and expressions you'd like to inspect, and this will make more sense, for example: if (((position > 0 && position < MAX) || (position < 0 && position > MIN) && (players(currentPlayer).isNotDead() && move.isAllowed()) && time.notUp())..... In this case you can evaluate the sub-expressions to see which one returns false
**Note**: You could also make the breakpoint conditional so that the program will pause only when that specific event occurs:
I am a Java Beginner and have a little question.
I have got 2 Classes:
the first one is a java formular, the important code is:
#Override
public void keyPressed(KeyEvent event) {
int key = event.getKeyCode();
if(key == 17) {
System.out.println("STRG");
if(roboter.running == true) {
roboter.running = false;
}
}
}
the second one is a class (called robot) which main part is the for loop:
public class Roboter {
public boolean running = false;
public void myFunction() {
for(...;...;...) {
for(...;...;...) {
if(!running)
break;
// DO SOMETHING IMPORTANT
}
}
}
Well, this doesn't work. I think it is because I can't change the value of running while my for loop. I have no idea how to slove this problem. Maybe there is an other solution? My aim is to stop the robots myFunction if an user press a key.I hope you can help me
I am sorry for my english, if you don't undestand me I will try to rewrite the question.
The class that handles the keyboard input should run in a separate Thread.