Is there any way that I can compile a gsp view into an html given a provided model from a groovy script without having to run all the Grails application?
The use case is that due to client demands we have to use Javascript/jQuery to create the front-end of the application. We've already had the architecture definition, but we're having issues creating integration front-end tests since our front-end composes of .gsp, javascript and css, all componentized.
For instance: Button may have a .gsp a .js and a .css associated to it.
Ideal solution to create front-end component integration tests: Have the .gsp compiled into html before the tests run so we can run the assertions in the *.test.js files. Since we don't need database, services or other instances to compile the .gsp, no need for the application to be running, avoiding the time to boot up the app.
Thanks in advance!
Next code should help you.
File gspFile = new File(BuildSettings.BASE_DIR, "grails-app/view/path/to/view/${viewName}.gsp")
This code will find gsp, you can find it by absoluteUrl
if(gspFile.exists()) {
def model = model((Class)scaffoldValue)
def viewGenerator = new GStringTemplateEngine()
Template t = viewGenerator.createTemplate(gspFile)
def contents = new FastStringWriter()
t.make(model.asMap()).writeTo(groovy.lang.Writer)
}
Writer you should find by yourself, think that it can be a stream to the file.
Didn't test it, but it should work :)
Related
When we dev/test our add-in, we need to request request http://dev.xx.com. and after release, in production we need to change the url to http://prod.xx.com.
How can we do this?
===
I'm new to vsto development and c#. I looked config file(in fact Settings.settings) way. But in fact i don't want the users to "config" it. It't better if I can build out two different versions in one click ervery time, and give one to testers and another to the end user.
When I devloping server-side springboot applications, I use 3 different config file and one single jar. And give the different config file and same sigle jar to different persons. This way at least we can confirm that the applicaiton (jar) is the same for test and deploy.
But the "Settings.settings" seems binded to the "solution" in vs. The pre processor seems not good enough, seems that it binded to the "solution" too. I have to change it in the "Properties" every time before I build the project? Or I need to create more "Solutions"?
Maybe I did't look that deep enough, I will keep looking
=== SOLVED
We finaly solved (partly) using Conditional compilation
#if DEBUG
const string baseUrl = "192.168.20.101:8001/api";
#endif
#if (!DEBUG)
const string baseUrl = "xxx.com/api";
#endif
one small issue is that we need to distribute debug package to our test team.
I am trying to write nice unit tests for my already created REST API. I have this simple structure:
ROOT/
config/
handlers/
lib/
models/
router/
main.go
config contains configuration in JSON and one simple config.go that reads and parses JSON file and fills the Config struct. handlers contains controllers (i.e. handlers of respective METHOD+URL described in router/routes.go). lib contains some DB, request responder and logger logic. models contains structs and their funcs to be mapped from-to JSON and DB. Finally router contains the router and routes definition.
Now I was searching and reading a lot about unit testing REST APIs in GO and found more or less satisfying articles about how to set up a testing server, define routes and test my requests. All fine. BUT only if you want to test a single file!
My problem is now how to set up the testing environment (server, routes, DB connection) for all handlers? With the approach found here (which I find very easy to understand and implement) I have one problem: either I have to run tests separately for each handler or I have to write test suites for all handlers in just one test file. I believe you understand that both cases are not very happy (1st because I need to preserve that running go test runs all tests that succeed and 2nd because having one test file to cover all handler funcs would become unmaintainable).
By now I have succeeded (according to the linked article) only if I put all testing and initializing code into just one func per XYZhandler_test.go file but I don't like this approach as well.
What I would like to achieve is kind of setUp() or init() that runs once with first triggered test making all required variables globally visible and initialized so that all next tests could use them already without the need of instantiating them again while making sure that this setup file is compiled only for tests...
I am not sure if this is completely clear or if some code example is required for this kind of question (other than what is already linked in the article but I will add anything that you think is required, just tell me!
Test packages, not files!
Since you're testing handlers/endpoints it would make sense to put all your _test files in either the handlers or the router package. (e.g. one file per endpoint/handler).
Also, don't use init() to setup your tests. The testing package specifies a function with the following signature:
func TestMain(m *testing.M)
The generated test will call TestMain(m) instead of running the tests
directly. TestMain runs in the main goroutine and can do whatever
setup and teardown is necessary around a call to m.Run. It should then
call os.Exit with the result of m.Run
Inside the TestMain function you can do whatever setup you need in order to run your tests. If you have global variables, this is the place to declare and initialize them. You only need to do this once per package, so it makes sense to put the TestMain code in a seperate _test file. For example:
package router
import (
"testing"
"net/http/httptest"
)
var (
testServer *httptest.Server
)
func TestMain(m *testing.M) {
// setup the test server
router := ConfigureRouter()
testServer = httptest.NewServer(router)
// run tests
os.Exit(m.Run())
}
Finally run the tests with go test my/package/router.
Perhaps you could put the setup code that you want to use from multiple unit test files into a separate package that only the unit tests use?
Or you could put the setup code into the normal package and just use it from the unit tests.
It's been asked before but the Go authors have chosen not to implicitly supply a test tag that could be used to selectively enable function compiles within the normal package files.
I've started to use Galen framework to test the layout of my website pages and I also have my other test, written in Selenium, integrated into Jenkins.
I'm using Java+JUnit+Maven and I would like to know if anyone has managed to integrate the Galen reporting into Jenkins and how.
Because for the moment I am using something like:
assertThat(layoutReport.errors(), is(0));
which tells me if there were errors in the tests but not where.
Thanks!
P.S. If someone with reputation could make the tag galen-framework so that we can group these type of questions, it would be great :D
In your case you could use Galen for generating HTML reports as it normally does when you run tests with it. Though you will have to manage the creation of GalenTestInfo objects.
Here is how the HTML report generation works. Imagine you have somewhere obtainAllTests method defined which returns a list of all executed tests.
List<GalenTestInfo> tests = obtainAllTests();
new HtmlReportBuilder().build(tests, "target/galen-html-reports");
Somewhere in your code you could create a GalenTestInfo and add it to some collection:
GalenTestInfo testInfo = GalenTestInfo.fromString("Here goes the name of your test");
Once you have done the layout checking and obtained LayoutReport object you could add this report to the report of the test. Here is how you can do it:
LayoutReport layoutReport = Galen.checkLayout(driver,
specPath, includedTags, null,
new Properties(), null);
testInfo.getReport().layout(layoutReport, "A title for your layout check");
You can find more insights in this project https://github.com/galenframework/galen-sample-java-tests. It has a basic setup for Galen tests in Java + TestNG + Maven. The reports in it are collected in a singleton GalenReportsContainer. There is also a reporter implemented in GalenReportingListener which takes all those tests from GalenReportsContainer and generates HTML reports.
You can see a full example for Java (TestNG and JUnit) and JavaScript here:
https://github.com/hypery2k/galen_samples.
I use the HTML Plugin together with Jenkins, see example here
I'm creating a workflow app with pyramid and i'm searching how to make the application modulable : meaning create a core app with sqlalchemy models, base forms with wtforms, and some base templates with mako.
The basic structure of the "Core" app is:
App_Core/core.ini
/setup.py
/...
/App_Core/
/__init__.py
/models.py
/forms.py
/utils.py
/templates/
/templates/base.mako...
/static/
/static/staticfiles...
My goal is to create 1 application per workflow which will be included in the Core app : it seems possible to do that via the includeme function provided with pyramid.
I want to include each workflow via the core.ini file, for example:
pyramid.includes =
workflow_app1
workflow_app2
workflow_app3
...
I defined an new app called workflow_app1 with the following structure:
worflow_app1/
/setup.py
/...
/workflow_app1/
/__init__.py
/models.py
/forms.py
/views.py
/templates/
/templates/workflow_app1.mako
/...
And the _init_.py file will contain the includeme function and will define new routes:
def includeme(config):
config.add_route('route1', '/route1/')
config.add_route('route2', '/route2/')
config.scan()
When i'm writing a view for the worflow_app1, i'm rendering to a template included with that app, but when i'm calling it from the core app, it can't render the template and gives the following error:
TopLevelLookupException: Cant locate template for uri 'workflow-app1.mako'
This error quite logical cause the mako.directories directive is given with the path App_Core_PATH/templates so my template should be in the same folder.
Question1:
Is it possible to make mako searching in each folder of modules the wanted templates?
Question2:
Is it possible to make the workflow-app1.mako inheriting of the base.mako from the core app?
Thanks by advance for your answer.
The solution that I would recommend is switching to asset specs for your templates. They are explicit, allow overriding, and provide better control over your template hierarchy. This means that you would stop using mako.directories and instead use 'workflow_app1:templates/workflow_app1.mako' in your inherits or include or renderer arguments. Given this, it's obvious that you can inherit from your base.mako in your core app, whereas managing the mako.directories option is more difficult.
If you're deadset on mako.directories then you can add a line to it every time you add a package to pyramid.includes.
mako.directores =
App_Core:templates
workflow_app1:templates
workflow_app2:templates
Another option is to switch to jinja2, as its plugin has the ability to add search paths after the fact. Thus your included modules can config.add_jinja2_search_path(...) throwing themselves into the lookup order. Pyramid's mako integration does not offer this option right now.
I am putting together some ideas for our automated testing platform and have been looking at Selenium for the test runner.
I am wrapping the recorded Selenium C# scripts in an MbUnit test, which is being triggered via the MbUnit NAnt task. The Selenium test client is created as follows:
selenium = new DefaultSelenium("host", 4444, "*iexplore", "http://[url]/");
How can I pass the host, port and url settings into the test so their values can be controlled via the NAnt task?
For example, I may have multiple Selenium RC servers listening and I want to use the same test code passing in each server address instead of embedding the settings within the tests themselves.
I have an approach mocked up using a custom NAnt task I have written but it is not the most elegant solution at present and I wondered if there was an easier way to accomplish what I want to do.
Many thanks if anyone can help.
Thanks for the responses so far.
Environment variables could work, however, we could be running parallel tests via a single test assembly so I wouldn't want settings to be overwritten during execution, which could break another test. Interesting line of thought though, thanks, I reckon I could use that in other areas.
My current solution involves a custom NAnt task build on top of the MbUnit task, which allows me to specify the additional host, port, url settings as attributes. These are then saved as a config file within the build directory and then read in by the test assemblies. This feels a bit "clunky" to me as my tests need to inherit from a specific class. Not too bad but I'd like to have less dependencies and concentrate on the testing.
Maybe I am worrying too much!!
I have a base class for all test fixtures which has the following setup code:
[FixtureSetUp]
public virtual void TestFixtureSetup ()
{
BrowserType = (BrowserType) Enum.Parse (typeof (BrowserType),
System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["BrowserType"],
true);
testMachine = System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["TestMachine"];
seleniumPort = int.Parse (System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["SeleniumPort"],
System.Globalization.CultureInfo.InvariantCulture);
seleniumSpeed = System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["SeleniumSpeed"];
browserUrl = System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["BrowserUrl"];
targetUrl = new Uri (System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["TargetUrl"]);
string browserExe;
switch (BrowserType)
{
case BrowserType.InternetExplorer:
browserExe = "*iexplore";
break;
case BrowserType.Firefox:
browserExe = "*firefox";
break;
default:
throw new NotSupportedException ();
}
selenium = new DefaultSelenium (testMachine, seleniumPort, browserExe, browserUrl);
selenium.Start ();
System.Console.WriteLine ("Started Selenium session (browser type={0})",
browserType);
// sets the speed of execution of GUI commands
if (false == String.IsNullOrEmpty (seleniumSpeed))
selenium.SetSpeed (seleniumSpeed);
}
I then simply supply the test runner with a config. file:
For MSBuild I use environment variables, I create those in my CC.NET config then they would be available in the script. I think this would work for you too.
Anytime I need to integrate with an external entity using NAnt I either end up using the exec task or writing a custom task. Given the information you posted it would seem that writing your own would indeed be a good solution, However you state you're not happy with it. Can you elaborate a bit on why you don't think you current solution is an elegant one?
Update
Not knowing internal details it seems like you've solved it pretty well with a custom task. From what I've heard, that's how I would have done it.
Maybe a new solution will show itself in time, but for now be light on yourself!