I am writing new tests in Nunit. I would like the tests to get their TestCaseSource values from an excel sheet (Data-driven tests).
However, I noticed that the [SetUp] method is actually accessed AFTER the [Test] method is entered, therefore I cannot initialize the data I read from my excel sheet in the TestCaseSource.
How do I init my TestCaseSource from an excel file BEFORE each test is running?
Thanks
I have tried using a separate class like MyFactoryClass and then used
[Test, TestCaseSource(typeof(MyFactoryClass), "TestCases")]
However, this is reached Before the [Setup] method and does not recognize the name of the excel file that is named after each tests' name.
It's important, when using NUnit, to understand the stages that a test goes through as it is loaded and then run. Because I don't know what you are doing at each stage, I'll start by outlining those stages. I'll add to this answer after you post some code that shows what your factory class, your [SetUp] method and your actual tests are doing.
In brief, NUnit loads tests before it runs them. It may actually run tests multiple tiems for each load - this depends on the type of runner being used. Examples:
NUnit-console loads tests once and runs them once, then exits.
TestCentric GUI loads tests once and then runs them each time you select tests and click run. It can reload them using a menu option as well.
TestExplorer, using the NUnit 3 Test Adapter, loads tests and then runs them each time you click run.
Ideally, you should write your tests so that they will work under any runner. To do that, you should assume that they will be run multiple times for each load. Don't write code at load time, which you want to see repeated for each run. If you follow this rule, you'll have more robust tests.
So... what does NUnit do at each stage? Here it is...
Loading...
All the code in your [TestCaseSource] executes.
Running...
For each TestFixture (I'll ignore SetUpFixtures for simplicity)
Run any [OneTimeSetUp] method
For each Test or TestCase
Run any [SetUp] method
Run the test itself
Run any [TearDown] method
Run any [OneTimeTearDown] method
As you noticed, the code you write for any step can only depend on steps that have already executed. In particular, the action taken when loading the test can't depend on actions that are part of running it. This makes sense if you consider that "loading" really means creating the test that will be run.
In your [TestCaseSource] you should only call a factory that creates objects if you know in advance what objects to create. Usually, the best approach is to initialize those parameters that will be used to create objects. Those are then used to actually create the objects in the [OneTimeSetUp] or [SetUp] depending on the object lifetime you are aiming for.
That's enough (maybe too much) generalization! If you post some code, I'll add more specific suggestions to this answer.
Related
I'm writing unit tests using Selenium and xunit and on their own they run great but if I select all of the tests (multiple classes) in Test Explorer (they appear to be grouped by class - this is not intentional) they run in parallel. Run Tests in Parallel is not selected. Each one of my tests creates and then deletes test data so they obviously can't run in parallel. One test might delete data right after another test created that data and so the test would fail. So how can I run all of my tests and not have them run in parallel? I guess I could make them all use one partial class that spans multiple files but that's not my first choice.
I found a solution (although not an explanation). Just put [Collection("Sequential")] as the first line under each namespace. This forces everything to run sequentially.
In my Mac Cocoa unit tests, I would like to output some files as part of the testing process, and delete them when the test is done, but only when there are no failures. How can this be done (and/or what's the cleanest way to do so)?
Your question made me curious so I looked into it!
I guess I would override the failWithException: method in the class SenTestCase (the class your tests run in inherits from this), and set a "keep output files" flag or something before calling the super's method.
Here's what SenTestCase.h says about that method:
/*"Failing a test, used by all macros"*/
- (void) failWithException:(NSException *) anException;
So, provided you only use the SenTest macros to test and/or fail (and chances are this is true in your case), that should cover any test failure.
I've never dug into the scripts for this, but it seems like you could customize how you call the script that actually runs your tests to do this. In Xcode 4, look at the last step in the Build Phases tab of your test target. Mine contains this:
# Run the unit tests in this test bundle.
"${SYSTEM_DEVELOPER_DIR}/Tools/RunUnitTests"
I haven't pored through the contents of this script or the many subscripts it pulls in on my machine, but presumably they call otest or some other test rig executable and the test results would be returned to that script. After a little time familiarizing yourself with those scripts you would likely be able to find a straightforward way to conditionally remove the output files based on the test results.
We use TestNG and Selenium WebDriver to test our web application.
Now our problem is that we often have several tests that need to run in a certain order, e.g.:
login to application
enter some data
edit the data
check that it's displayed correctly
Now obviously these tests need to run in that precise order.
At the same time, we have many other tests which are totally independent from the list of tests above.
So we'd like to be able to somehow put tests into "groups" (not necessarily groups in the TestNG sense), and then run them such that:
tests inside one "group" always run together and in the same order
but different test "groups" as a whole can run in any order
The second point is important, because we want to avoid dependencies between tests in different groups (so different test "groups" can be used and developed independently).
Is there a way to achieve this using TestNG?
Solutions we tried
At first we just put tests that belong together into one class, and used dependsOnMethods to make them run in the right order. This used to work in TestNG V5, but in V6 TestNG will sometimes interleave tests from different classes (while respecting the ordering imposed by dependsOnMethods). There does not seem to be a way to tell TestNG "Always run tests from one class together".
We considered writing a method interceptor. However, this has the disadvantage that running tests from inside an IDE becomes more difficult (because directly invoking a test on a class would not use the interceptor). Also, tests using dependsOnMethods cannot be ordered by the interceptor, so we'd have to stop using that. We'd probably have to create our own annotation to specify ordering, and we'd like to use standard TestNG features as far as possible.
The TestNG docs propose using preserve-order to order tests. That looks promising, but only works if you list every test method separately, which seems redundant and hard to maintain.
Is there a better way to achieve this?
I am also open for any other suggestions on how to handle tests that build on each other, without having to impose a total order on all tests.
PS
alanning's answer points out that we could simply keep all tests independent by doing the necessary setup inside each test. That is in principle a good idea (and some tests do this), however sometimes we need to test a complete workflow, with each step depending on all previous steps (as in my example). To do that with "independent" tests would mean running the same multi-step setup over and over, and that would make our already slow tests even slower. Instead of three tests doing:
Test 1: login to application
Test 2: enter some data
Test 3: edit the data
we would get
Test 1: login to application
Test 2: login to application, enter some data
Test 3: login to application, enter some data, edit the data
etc.
In addition to needlessly increasing testing time, this also feels unnatural - it should be possible to model a workflow as a series of tests.
If there's no other way, this is probably how we'll do it, but we are looking for a better solution, without repeating the same setup calls.
You are mixing "functionality" and "test". Separating them will solve your problem.
For example, create a helper class/method that executes the steps to log in, then call that class/method in your Login test and all other tests that require the user to be logged in.
Your other tests do not actually need to rely on your Login "Test", just the login class/method.
If later back-end modifications introduce a bug in the login process, all of the tests which rely on the Login helper class/method will still fail as expected.
Update:
Turns out this already has a name, the Page Object pattern. Here is a page with Java examples of using this pattern:
http://code.google.com/p/selenium/wiki/PageObjects
Try with depends on group along with depends on method. Add all methods in same class in one group.
For example
#Test(groups={"cls1","other"})
public void cls1test1(){
}
#Test(groups={"cls1","other"}, dependsOnMethods="cls1test1", alwaysrun=true)
public void cls1test2(){
}
In class 2
#Test(groups={"cls2","other"}, dependsOnGroups="cls1", alwaysrun=true)
public void cls2test1(){
}
#Test(groups={"cls2","other"}, dependsOnMethods="cls2test1", dependsOnGroups="cls1", alwaysrun=true)
public void cls2test2(){
}
There is an easy (whilst hacky) workaround for this if you are comfortable with your first approach:
At first we just put tests that belong together into one class, and used dependsOnMethods to make them run in the right order. This used to work in TestNG V5, but in V6 TestNG will sometimes interleave tests from different classes (while respecting the ordering imposed by dependsOnMethods). There does not seem to be a way to tell TestNG "Always run tests from one class together".
We had a similar problem: we need our tests to be run class-wise because we couldn't guarantee the test classes not interfering with each other.
This is what we did:
Put a
#Test( dependsOnGroups= { "dummyGroupToMakeTestNGTreatThisAsDependentClass" } )
Annotation on an Abstract Test Class or Interface that all your Tests inherit from.
This will put all your methods in the "first group" (group as described in this paragraph, not TestNG-groups). Inside the groups the ordering is class-wise.
Thanks to Cedric Beust, he provided a very quick answer for this.
Edit:
The group dummyGroupToMakeTestNGTreatThisAsDependentClass actually has to exist, but you can just add a dummy test case for that purpose..
I have several GWTTestCases in my test suite, and I'm currently using a homegrown testing script which is written in Java that runs tests as follows:
for(Class<?> testClass : allTestClasses) {
final JUnitCore core = new JUnitCore();
final Result result = core.run(testClass);
}
Now, the first GWT test will pass and all subsequent tests will fail. It doesn't matter which test runs first, and I can run the tests successfully from the command line.
Looking through the logs, the specific error is typically like:
java.lang.RuntimeException: deepthought.test.JUnit:package.GwtTestCaseClass.testMethod: could not instantiate the requested class
I think it has something to do with GWTTestCase static state, but am unsure. If I do one run where I pass all the testClasses to the core, they all pass, and then subsequently any individual test will pass.
My guess is that gwt compiles and caches the tests you are running, and then stores them based on the module. But in this case, the compiler misses my other test cases, because it doesn't see a dependency to them. Then for the next test, it comes back to the cache, hits it and fails to find the test I want.
Any thoughts on a workaround, other than just passing all the tests in at once?
The workaround I discovered is to first add all the GWTTestCase classes to a GWTTestSuite, which you can then throw away. You don't incur the cost of compilation at this point, but it somehow makes GWT aware of all the test cases, and so when you compile the first one...they all get compiled.
If you ask me, this is a GWT bug.
Using OCUnit & Xcode, is there a way of running just one test?
Ideally, I'd be able to run just one test method, but if there's a way to just run a single test case, that would be OK too.
What I'm currently doing is running the 'Test' task which runs all of my tests, but this takes up a lot of time, which ideally could be spent doing other things.
See this post from an Xcode engineer:
http://chanson.livejournal.com/119578.html
The last paragraph explains how to specify a single test case class.
For more info see Chris' entire series on unit testing:
http://chanson.livejournal.com/tag/unit%20testing