I want to start using FakeItEasy for testing queries.
The tests I want to write should check if entities are returned on HttpGet calls (get all and get by Id)
The Controller:
public class ToDoController : ControllerBase
{
private readonly IMediator _mediator;
public ToDoController(IMediator mediator) =>
_mediator = mediator;
[HttpGet]
[Produces("application/json")]
[ProducesResponseType(typeof(IEnumerable<ToDoItem>), (int)HttpStatusCode.OK)]
public async Task<ActionResult<IEnumerable<ToDoItem>>> Get()
{
var result = await _mediator.Send(new ToDoItemsQuery(new
AllToDoItems())).ConfigureAwait(false);
if (result != null && result.Any())
{
return result.ToList();
}
throw new InvalidOperationException("TODO: error handling");
}
[HttpGet]
[Route("{id}")]
[Produces("application/json")]
[ProducesResponseType(typeof(ToDoItem), (int)HttpStatusCode.OK)]
public async Task<ActionResult<ToDoItem>> GetById(int itemId)
{
var result = await _mediator
.Send(new ToDoItemsQuery(new ToDoItemById(itemId)))
.ConfigureAwait(false);
if (result != null && result.Any())
{
return result.FirstOrDefault();
}
throw new InvalidOperationException("TODO: error handling");
}
}
}
The TestClass:
public class ToDoItemControllerTests : ControllerTestBase
{
private IMediator _mediator;
private ToDoController _sut;
public ToDoItemControllerTests()
{
_mediator = A.Fake<IMediator>();
_sut = new ToDoController(_mediator);
}
[TestMethod]
public async Task GetAllItemsAsync_SuccessTest()
{
A.CallTo(() => _mediator.Send(A<AllToDoItems>._,
A<CancellationToken>._)).Returns(A.CollectionOfFake<ToDoItem>(10));
var result = await _sut.Get();
Assert.IsNotNull(result);
A.CallTo(() => _mediator).MustHaveHappened();
}
[TestMethod]
public async Task GetItemByIdAsync_SuccessTest()
{
// Arrange
int itemId = 2;
var commandResult =
new List<ToDoItem>
{
new ToDoItem
{
Id = itemId
};
}
A.CallTo(() => MediatR.Send(A<ToDoItemById>._, A<CancellationToken>._)).Returns(commandResult);
// Act
var result = await _sut.GetById(itemId);
// Assert
Assert.IsNotNull(result);
A.CallTo(() => MediatR.Send(A<ToDoItemById>._, A<CancellationToken>._)).MustHaveHappened();
}
}
So in the first test I set up A.CallTo the interface IMediatR to return 10 ToDoItems.
During debug I see the _sut.Get() enter the controller, entering the correct method/api call.
The _mediator.Send() in the controller returns a Fake IEnumerable (not the 10 items i set up in the first Call.To in the testmethod, but an enumeration that yields no results).
Because of the result.Any() being false, the controller throws an InvalidOperationException
And I cannot even Assert the result.IsNotNull()
The second test I want to Test If 1 item is returned upon calling the API.
I set up (a) an itemId of type int for parameter,
(b) A mocked(?) List with 1 Item from the setup with the itemId and
(c) a call to the mediatR should return the mocked Listfrom (b)
I make the call from the test, in debug I see the call await _mediator.Sent() returning
A Fake Ienumerable of ToDoItem, result is not null, but because result.Any() is false,
the item doesn't get returned, and I get another InvalidOperationException
I feel like I'm missing something in the setup of the tests..
A Fake database Interface?
I don't want to chance my controller and make the if less restrictive, just so my test would pass
EDIT:
Even if I change the if condition to removing the Any condition
and I see the test entering the controller, returning "First Or Default" of the result,
The test fails on A Call To Must Have Happened.
Expected to find it once or more but no calls were made to the fake object.
This I really don't get, i actually see him making the call?!
I've browsed GitHub to find examples but the closest I found was Entities with methods, with those methods being defined in an interface. This is not the case here
Seeing as the official documentation doesn't make me any wiser I turn to SO <3
Thanks in advance!
In the first test, you configure the call to Send with an argument of type AllToDoItems. But in the controller, you actually call Send with a TodoItemsQuery. So the call doesn't match, and the default (unconfigured) behavior, which is to return a fake IEnumerable, applies. You need to configure the call like this:
A.CallTo(() => _mediator.Send(A<TodoItemsQuery>._,
A<CancellationToken>._)).Returns(A.CollectionOfFake<ToDoItem>(10));
In the second test, the problem is the same, with ToDoItemById instead of AllToDoItems
Related
I recently started learning Unit Testing and now have the requirement write unit tests using Xunit and Moq for dot net core application.
I can write some very basic but when it comes to write them for complex classes , I am kind of stuck.
Below is the class I will be writing tests for.
public class AgeCategoryRequestHandler : IInventoryRequestHandler<InventoryRequest, HandlerResult>
{
private readonly IRepositoryResolver _repositoryResolver;
Hotels.HBSI.Logging.ILogger logger;
public AgeCategoryRequestHandler(IRepositoryResolver repositoryResolver, Hotels.HBSI.Logging.ILogger iLogger)
{
_repositoryResolver = repositoryResolver;
logger = iLogger;
}
public async Task<HandlerResult> Run(InventoryRequest inventoryRequest)
{
var result = await ProcessRequest(inventoryRequest);
return CreateResponse(inventoryRequest, result);
}
private async Task<int> ProcessRequest(InventoryRequest inventoryRequest)
{
logger.Info("AgeCategory requesthandler processrequest start");
var repository = _repositoryResolver.ResolveEstabAgeCategory();
if (repository is not null)
{
return await repository.InsertUpdateEstabAgeCategoryDetail(inventoryRequest.EstabAgeCategories)
.ConfigureAwait(false);
}
logger.Info("AgeCategory requesthandler processrequest complete");
return InernalError.reponotfound;
}
public HandlerResult CreateResponse(InventoryRequest inventoryRequest, int resultCount)
{
var requestCount = inventoryRequest.EstabAgeCategories.Count;
var handlerResult = new HandlerResult() { Id = RequestHandlerEnum.AgeCategrory.ToInt() };
if (requestCount > 0 && resultCount < requestCount)
{
handlerResult.IsSuccess = false;
handlerResult.ErrorCode = OTAErrorType.InvalidAgeCategory.ToInt();
}
else if (requestCount > 0 || requestCount == resultCount)
{
handlerResult.IsSuccess = true;
handlerResult.ErrorCode = 0;
}
return handlerResult;
}
}
Just to start , IRepositoryResolver and ILogger are in the constructor so I have created mock for these but unable to go beyond that as I am still in initial phase of learning.
Could someone explain me the steps/approach to accomplish this?.
Edit : What I have done so far is below ( can't figure out what are the things to be done and where to start or write )
Edit 2 : Did some more modifications to my test code , can someone comment if I am in right direction ? what else can I test ?
public class AgeCategoryRequestHandlerTest
{
private AgeCategoryRequestHandler _ageCategoryRequestHandler;
private readonly Mock<AgeCategoryRequestHandler> _ageCategory = new Mock<AgeCategoryRequestHandler>();
private readonly Mock<Hotels.HBSI.Logging.ILogger> _mockLogger = new Mock<Hotels.HBSI.Logging.ILogger>();
private readonly Mock<IRepositoryResolver> _mockRepositoryResolver = new Mock<IRepositoryResolver>();
public AgeCategoryRequestHandlerTest()
{
_ageCategoryRequestHandler = new AgeCategoryRequestHandler(_mockRepositoryResolver.Object, _mockLogger.Object);
}
[Fact]
public async void Testtt()
{
var fixture = new Fixture();
var inventory = fixture.Create<InventoryRequest>();
var hndlr = fixture.Create<HandlerResult>();
hndlr.ErrorCode = 0;
int resultCount = 3;
await _ageCategoryRequestHandler.Run(inventory);
HandlerResult response = _ageCategoryRequestHandler.CreateResponse(inventory, resultCount);
Assert.Equal(hndlr.ErrorCode, response.ErrorCode);
}
Tried running Chris B suggested code , was getting type conversion error EstabAgeCategories = new List<int>
Now I have used fixture for creating automatic objects and did some assert values. Below is the code sample
var fixture = new Fixture();
var inventoryRequest = fixture.Create<InventoryRequest>();
_mockRepository
.Setup(x => x.InsertUpdateEstabAgeCategoryDetail(inventoryRequest.EstabAgeCategories))
.ReturnsAsync(6);
_mockRepositoryResolver
.Setup(x => x.ResolveEstabAgeCategory())
.Returns(_mockRepository.Object);
// act
var result = await _ageCategoryRequestHandler.Run(inventoryRequest);
// assert
_mockRepository
.Verify(x => x.InsertUpdateEstabAgeCategoryDetail(inventoryRequest.EstabAgeCategories), Times.Once);
Assert.True(result.Id == 6);
Assert.True(result.ErrorCode == 0);
Assert.True(result.IsSuccess);
From the unit test code you've posted, it looks like you are getting confused on what to test.
Look at your class and identify your "public" interface i.e. what methods can be called from other parts of your code. You should really only test public methods. Private methods are usually tested via public methods.
Looking at AgeCategoryRequestHandler, you have two public methods - Run and CreateResponse. I would question whether CreateResponse needs to be public but we'll leave it for now. For each of these methods, you want to be asserting that the returned value is what you expect given the input value.
private AgeCategoryRequestHandler _ageCategoryRequestHandler;
// Not needed
private readonly Mock<AgeCategoryRequestHandler> _ageCategory = new Mock<AgeCategoryRequestHandler>();
private readonly Mock<Hotels.HBSI.Logging.ILogger> _mockLogger = new Mock<Hotels.HBSI.Logging.ILogger>();
private readonly Mock<IRepositoryResolver> _mockRepositoryResolver = new Mock<IRepositoryResolver>();
public AgeCategoryRequestHandlerTest()
{
_ageCategoryRequestHandler = new AgeCategoryRequestHandler(_mockRepositoryResolver.Object, _mockLogger.Object);
}
The set up of the unit test is going the right way - you have created mocks for your dependencies but I see you have created a mock for the class you are trying to test - this is not needed and can be removed. You want to be testing the actual class itself which you are initializing in the constructor.
public async Task<HandlerResult> Run(InventoryRequest inventoryRequest)
{
var result = await ProcessRequest(inventoryRequest);
return CreateResponse(inventoryRequest, result);
}
private async Task<int> ProcessRequest(InventoryRequest inventoryRequest)
{
_logger.LogInformation("AgeCategory requesthandler processrequest start");
var repository = _repositoryResolver.ResolveEstabAgeCategory();
if (repository != null)
{
return await repository.InsertUpdateEstabAgeCategoryDetail(inventoryRequest.EstabAgeCategories).ConfigureAwait(false);
}
_logger.LogInformation("AgeCategory requesthandler processrequest complete");
return 0;
}
We can test the public Run method by looking at the method and seeing what it is going to do when executed. Firstly, it's going to call a private method ProcessRequest. Inside ProcessRequest, the IRepositoryResolver dependency is going to be used. This means we need to "set up" this dependency in our unit test to satisfy the if (repository != null) condition.
I assume the IRepositoryResolver returns another interface (?) - something like:
public interface IRepository
{
Task<int> InsertUpdateEstabAgeCategoryDetail(List<int> x);
}
So in your unit test, you need to create a mock for the repository being returned from IRepositoryResolver:
private readonly Mock<IRepository> _mockRepository = new Mock<IRepository>();
Then, you need to set up the mock IRepositoryResolver to return the mock repository above:
_mockRepositoryResolver
.Setup(x => x.ResolveEstabAgeCategory())
.Returns(_mockRepository.Object);
This is to satisfy the if (repository != null) condition.
_mockRepository
.Setup(x => x.InsertUpdateEstabAgeCategoryDetail(inventoryRequest.EstabAgeCategories))
.ReturnsAsync(6);
Next, you need to set up the InsertUpdateEstabAgeCategoryDetail() method on the mock repository to return a value. This value is being returned by ProcessRequest() and then used to call CreateResponse(inventoryRequest, result) as the result parameter.
if (requestCount > 0 && resultCount < requestCount)
{
handlerResult.IsSuccess = false;
handlerResult.ErrorCode = (int)OTAErrorType.InvalidAgeCategory;
}
else if (requestCount > 0 || requestCount == resultCount)
{
handlerResult.IsSuccess = true;
handlerResult.ErrorCode = 0;
}
Now you can look at the CreateResponse method and by setting different values for inventoryRequest.EstabAgeCategories and setting up the mock _mockRepository.Setup(x => x.InsertUpdateEstabAgeCategoryDetail(inventoryRequest.EstabAgeCategories)).ReturnsAsync(6); to return different values, you can satisfy the different paths through the if statement.
CreateResponse is returning an instance of HandlerResult which in turn is being returned by Task<HandlerResult> Run. This is the returned object you want to make assertions on.
One of the unit test cases might look like this (I have not tested it myself):
[Fact]
public async Task GivenInventoryRequest_WhenRun_ThenHandlerResultReturned()
{
// arrange
var inventoryRequest = new InventoryRequest
{
EstabAgeCategories = new List<int>
{
1, 2, 3, 4, 5
}
};
_mockRepository
.Setup(x => x.InsertUpdateEstabAgeCategoryDetail(inventoryRequest.EstabAgeCategories))
.ReturnsAsync(6);
_mockRepositoryResolver
.Setup(x => x.ResolveEstabAgeCategory())
.Returns(_mockRepository.Object);
// act
var result = await _ageCategoryRequestHandler.Run(inventoryRequest);
// assert
_mockRepository
.Verify(x => x.InsertUpdateEstabAgeCategoryDetail(inventoryRequest.EstabAgeCategories), Times.Once);
Assert.True(result.Id == 0);
Assert.True(result.ErrorCode == 0);
Assert.False(result.IsSuccess);
}
I want to switch my code to an async implementation. When I want to do this then I notice that my related data gets not set automatically after I retrieve them like it used to do it.
This is the initial function that gets called from an API controller. I used the AddDbContext function to add the dbcontext class via dependency injection into my controller:
public async Task<Application> GetApplicationById(AntragDBNoInheritanceContext dbContext, int id)
{
List<Application> ApplicationList = await dbContext.Applications.FromSqlRaw("Exec dbo.GetApplication {0}", id).ToListAsync();
Application Application = ApplicationList.First();
if(Application != null)
{
await CategoryFunctions.GetCategoryByApplicationID(Application.Id);
}
}
The GetCategoryByApplicationId function loads the related category of an application which is a many to one relation between Category and Application:
public async Task<Category> GetCategoryByApplicationID(int applicationID)
{
var optionsBuilder = new DbContextOptionsBuilder<AntragDBNoInheritanceContext>();
optionsBuilder.UseSqlServer(ApplicationDBConnection.APPLICATION_CONNECTION);
using (var dbContext = new AntragDBNoInheritanceContext(optionsBuilder.Options))
{
List<Category> category = await dbContext.Categories.FromSqlRaw("Exec GetApplicationCategory {0}", applicationID).ToListAsync();
if (category.Any())
{
return category.First();
}
}
return null;
}
When I want to retrieve an application then the field Category is not set. When I did not use async/await it would set the category automatically for me. Of course I could just return the Category Object from the GetCategoryByApplicationId and then say:
Application.Category = RetrievedFromDbCategory;
But this seems a bit unmaintainable compared to the previous behaviour. Why does this happen now and can I do something about it? Otherwise I don't see much benefits on using async/await .
In ASP.NET Core 5 I had a custom Action Result as follows:
public class ErrorResult : ActionResult {
private readonly IList<Error> _errors;
public ErrorResult(IList<Error> errors) {
_errors = errors;
}
public override async Task ExecuteResultAsync(ActionContext context) {
// Code that creates Response
await result.ExecuteResultAsync(context);
}
}
Then on a Controller action I would have:
return new ErrorResult(errors);
How to do something similar in NET 6 Minimal APIs?
I have been looking at it and I think I should implement IResult.
But I am not sure if that is the solution or how to do it.
I have recently been playing around with minimal APIs and and working on global exception handling. Here is what I have come up with so far.
Create a class implementation of IResult
Create a constructor which will take an argument of the details you want going into your IResult response. APIErrorDetails is a custom implementation of mine similar to what you'd see in ProblemDetails in MVC. Method implementation is open to whatever your requirements are.
public class ExceptionAllResult : IResult
{
private readonly ApiErrorDetails _details;
public ExceptionAllResult(ApiErrorDetails details)
{
_details = details;
}
public async Task ExecuteAsync(HttpContext httpContext)
{
var jsonDetails = JsonSerializer.Serialize(_details);
httpContext.Response.ContentType = MediaTypeNames.Application.Json;
httpContext.Response.ContentLength = Encoding.UTF8.GetByteCount(jsonDetails);
httpContext.Response.StatusCode = _details.StatusCode;
await httpContext.Response.WriteAsync(jsonDetails);
}
}
Return result in your exception handling middleware in your Program.cs file.
app.UseExceptionHandler(
x =>
{
x.Run(
async context =>
{
// https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/fundamentals/error-handling?view=aspnetcore-6.0
var exceptionFeature = context.Features.Get<IExceptionHandlerPathFeature>();
// Whatever you want for null handling
if (exceptionFeature is null) throw new Exception();
// My result service for creating my API details from the HTTP context and exception. This returns the Result class seen in the code snippet above
var result = resultService.GetErrorResponse(exceptionFeature.Error, context);
await result.ExecuteAsync(context); // returns the custom result
});
}
);
If you still want to use MVC (Model-View-Controller), you still can use Custom ActionResult.
If you just want to use Minimal APIs to do the response, then you have to implement IResult, Task<IResult> or ValueTask<IResult>.
app.MapGet("/hello", () => Results.Ok(new { Message = "Hello World" }));
The following example uses the built-in result types to customize the response:
app.MapGet("/api/todoitems/{id}", async (int id, TodoDb db) =>
await db.Todos.FindAsync(id)
is Todo todo
? Results.Ok(todo)
: Results.NotFound())
.Produces<Todo>(StatusCodes.Status200OK)
.Produces(StatusCodes.Status404NotFound);
You can find more IResult implementation samples here: https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore/tree/main/src/Http/Http.Results/src
Link: Minimal APIs overview | Microsoft Docs
Currently I am looking for best practice in handling conditions inside the controller actions in asp.net mvc. For example -
public ActionResult Edit(int Id = 0)
{
var Item = _todoListItemsRepository.Find(Id);
**if (Item == null)
return View("NotFound");
if (!Item.IsAuthorized())
return View("NotValidOwner");**
return View("Edit", Item);
}
The above two conditions marked in bold is used in other actions inside the controller. So, in order not to repeat these conditions in all the actions. I have used the below approach.
[HttpGet]
[Authorize]
[ModelStatusActionFilter]
public ActionResult Edit(int Id = 0)
{
var Item = _todoListItemsRepository.Find(Id);
return View("Edit", Item);
}
public class ModelStatusActionFilterAttribute : ActionFilterAttribute
{
private readonly ITodoListItemsRepository _todoListItemsRepository;
public ModelStatusActionFilterAttribute()
: this(new TodoListItemsRepository())
{
}
public ModelStatusActionFilterAttribute(ITodoListItemsRepository todoListItemsRepository)
{
_todoListItemsRepository = todoListItemsRepository;
}
public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext)
{
try
{
var Id = Convert.ToInt32(filterContext.RouteData.Values["Id"]);
var Item = _todoListItemsRepository.Find(Id);
if (Item == null)
{
filterContext.Result = new ViewResult() { ViewName = "NotFound" };
}
else if (!Item.IsAuthorized())
{
filterContext.Result = new ViewResult() { ViewName = "NotValidOwner" };
}
}
catch
{
}
}
}
I am unsure if this is the best practice in handling such scenarios. So, could someone please advise ?
Regards,
Ram
usually you don't use action filter for so-called business logic of your web application - this is what the controllers are for. Action filter are rather for the whole stuff which is external to the actual logic - common case is logging, performance measurement, checking if user is authenticated / authorized (I don't think this is your case, although you call IsAuthorized method on the "Item").
Reducing code is generally good thing but in this case, I don't think putting the logic to action is a good way, because you;ve actually made it a bit unreadable, and unreadable code is in my opinon much worse than repeated code.
Also, specifically in your case, for all valid items you actually call the _todoListItemsRepository.Find() twice (for each valid item), which might be costly if this is some webservice call or db lookup.
If the code is just repeated throughout the actions, make a method out of it like:
private View ValidateItem(Item) {
if (Item == null)
return View("NotFound");
if (!Item.IsAuthorized())
return View("NotValidOwner");
return null; }
I'm not sure the correct way to structure this test. I've got a view model here:
public class ViewModel
{
public ReactiveCommand PerformSearchCommand { get; private set; }
private readonly ObservableAsPropertyHelper<bool> _IsBusy;
public bool IsBusy
{
get { return _IsBusy.Value; }
}
public ViewModel(IAdventureWorksRepository _awRepository)
{
PerformSearchCommand = new ReactiveCommand();
PerformSearchCommand.RegisterAsyncFunction((x) =>
{
return _awRepository.vIndividualCustomers.Take(1000).ToList();
}).Subscribe(rval =>
{
CustomerList = rval;
SelectedCustomer = CustomerList.FirstOrDefault();
});
PerformSearchCommand.IsExecuting.ToProperty(this, x => x.IsBusy, out _IsBusy);
PerformSearchCommand.Execute(null); // begin executing immediately
}
}
The dependency is a data access object to AdventureWorks
public interface IAdventureWorksRepository
{
IQueryable<vIndividualCustomer> vIndividualCustomers { get; }
}
Finally, my test looks something like this:
[TestMethod]
public void TestTiming()
{
new TestScheduler().With(sched =>
{
var repoMock = new Mock<IAdventureWorksRepository>();
repoMock.Setup(x => x.vIndividualCustomers).Returns(() =>
{
return new vIndividualCustomer[] {
new vIndividualCustomer { FirstName = "John", LastName = "Doe" }
};
});
var vm = new ViewModel(repoMock.Object);
Assert.AreEqual(true, vm.IsBusy); //fails?
Assert.AreEqual(1, vm.CustomerList.Count); //also fails, so it's not like the whole thing ran already
sched.AdvanceTo(2);
Assert.AreEqual(1, vm.CustomerList.Count); // success
// now the customer list is set at tick 2 (not at 1?)
// IsBusy was NEVER true.
});
}
So the viewmodel should immediately begin searching upon load
My immediate problem is that the IsBusy property doesn't seem to get set in the testing scheduler, even though it seems to work fine when I run the code normally. Am I using the ToProperty method correctly in the view model?
More generally, what is the proper way to do the full 'time travel' testing when my object under test has a dependency like this? The issue is that unlike most testing examples I'm seeing, the called interface is not an IObservable. It's just a synchronous query, used asynchronously in my view model. Of course in the view model test, I can mock the query to do whatever rx things I want. How would I set this up if I wanted the query to last 200 ticks, for example?
So, you've got a few things in your code that is stopping you from getting things to work correctly:
Don't invoke commands in ViewModel Constructors
First, calling Execute in the constructor means you'll never see the state change. The best pattern is to write that command but not execute it in the VM immediately, then in the View:
this.WhenAnyValue(x => x.ViewModel)
.InvokeCommand(this, x => x.ViewModel.PerformSearchCommand);
Move the clock after async actions
Ok, now that we can properly test the before and after state, we have to realize that after every time we do something that normally would be async, we have to advance the scheduler if we use TestScheduler. This means, that when we invoke the command, we should immediately advance the clock:
Assert.IsTrue(vm.PerformSearchCommand.CanExecute(null));
vm.PerformSearchCommand.Execute(null);
sched.AdvanceByMs(10);
Can't test Time Travel without IObservable
However, the trick is, your mock executes code immediately, there's no delay, so you'll never see it be busy. It just returns a canned value. Unfortunately, injecting the Repository makes this difficult to test if you want to see IsBusy toggle.
So, let's rig the constructor a little bit:
public ViewModel(IAdventureWorksRepository _awRepository, Func<IObservable<List<Customer>>> searchCommand = null)
{
PerformSearchCommand = new ReactiveCommand();
searchCommand = searchCommand ?? () => Observable.Start(() => {
return _awRepository.vIndividualCustomers.Take(1000).ToList();
}, RxApp.TaskPoolScheduler);
PerformSearchCommand.RegisterAsync(searchCommand)
.Subscribe(rval => {
CustomerList = rval;
SelectedCustomer = CustomerList.FirstOrDefault();
});
PerformSearchCommand.IsExecuting
.ToProperty(this, x => x.IsBusy, out _IsBusy);
}
Set up the test now
Now, we can set up the test, to replace PerformSearchCommand's action with something that has a delay on it:
new TestScheduler().With(sched =>
{
var repoMock = new Mock<IAdventureWorksRepository>();
var vm = new ViewModel(repoMock.Object, () =>
Observable.Return(new[] { new vIndividualCustomer(), })
.Delay(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(1.0), sched));
Assert.AreEqual(false, vm.IsBusy);
Assert.AreEqual(0, vm.CustomerList.Count);
vm.PerformSearchCommand.Execute(null);
sched.AdvanceByMs(10);
// We should be busy, we haven't finished yet - no customers
Assert.AreEqual(true, vm.IsBusy);
Assert.AreEqual(0, vm.CustomerList.Count);
// Skip ahead to after we've returned the customer
sched.AdvanceByMs(1000);
Assert.AreEqual(false, vm.IsBusy);
Assert.AreEqual(1, vm.CustomerList.Count);
});