I have a SetUp method that checks GetParam() value. Something like:
void Tests::SetUp() {
if (GetParam().data == x) {
do_something;
}
}
However, some of my tests are P_TESTs, and some are F_TESTs. The F_TESTs do not have a parameter, so I get a segmentation fault when SetUp is called for these tests, as GetParam().data cannot be read!
Is there a way to check that the test has a parameter from inside of the SetUp method?
Thanks.
Related
my scenario: I have an existing unit test framework with ~3000 individual test cases. They are made from TEST, TEST_F and TEST_P macros.
Internally the tested modules make use of a logger library and now my goal is to create individual log files for each test case. To do so I would like to call a function as a SetUp for each test case.
Is there a way to register such function at the framework and get it called automatically?
The obvious solution for me would look like: do the work in a test fixture constructor or SetUp() but then I'd have to touch every single test case.
I do like the idea of registering a global setup at the framework with AddGlobalTestEnvironment() but as I understand this is handled only once per executable.
By the way: I have acceptance tests implemented in robot test and guess what? I want to repeat the task there...
Thanks for any inspiration!
Christoph
You mentioned:
The obvious solution for me would look like: do the work in a test fixture constructor or SetUp() but then I'd have to touch every single test case.
If the reason that you think you would need to touch every single test case is to set the filename differently, you can use the combination of SetUp() function and the current_test_info provided by GTest to get the test name for each test, and then use that to create a separate file for each test.
Here is an example:
// Class for test fixture
class MyTestFixture : public ::testing::Test {
protected:
void SetUp() override {
test_name_ = std::string(
::testing::UnitTest::GetInstance()->current_test_info()->name());
std::cout << "test_name_: " << test_name_ << std::endl;
// CreateYourLogFileUsingTestName(test_name_);
}
std::string test_name_;
};
TEST_F(MyTestFixture, Test1) {
EXPECT_EQ(this->test_name_, std::string("Test1"));
}
TEST_F(MyTestFixture, Test2) {
EXPECT_EQ(this->test_name_, std::string("Test2"));
}
Live example here: https://godbolt.org/z/YjzEG3G77
The solution I found in the gtest docs:
class TraceHandler : public testing::EmptyTestEventListener
{
// Called before a test starts.
void OnTestStart( const testing::TestInfo& test_info ) override
{
// set the logfilename here
}
// Called after a test ends.
void OnTestEnd( const testing::TestInfo& test_info ) override
{
// close the log here
}
};
int main( int argc, char** argv )
{
testing::InitGoogleTest( &argc, argv );
testing::TestEventListeners& listeners =
testing::UnitTest::GetInstance()->listeners();
// Adds a listener to the end. googletest takes the ownership.
listeners.Append(new TraceHandler);
return RUN_ALL_TESTS();
}
This way it automatically applies to all tests linked to this main-function.
Maybe I have to mention: my logger is a collection of static functions that send udp-packets to a receiver that cares for actual logging. I can control the filename by one of that functions. That's the reason why I don't need to insert code in every single TEST, TEST_F or TEST_P.
I've just tried to write a simple test for Auth:
use Mockery as m;
...
public function testHomeWhenUserIsNotAuthenticatedThenRedirectToWelcome() {
$auth = m::mock('Illuminate\Auth\AuthManager');
$auth->shouldReceive('guest')->once()->andReturn(true);
$this->call('GET', '/');
$this->assertRedirectedToRoute('general.welcome');
}
public function testHomeWhenUserIsAuthenticatedThenRedirectToDashboard() {
$auth = m::mock('Illuminate\Auth\AuthManager');
$auth->shouldReceive('guest')->once()->andReturn(false);
$this->call('GET', '/');
$this->assertRedirectedToRoute('dashboard.overview');
}
This is the code:
public function getHome() {
if(Auth::guest()) {
return Redirect::route('general.welcome');
}
return Redirect::route('dashboard.overview');
}
When I run, I've got the following error:
EF.....
Time: 265 ms, Memory: 13.00Mb
There was 1 error:
1) PagesControllerTest::testHomeWhenUserIsNotAuthenticatedThenRedirectToWelcome
Mockery\Exception\InvalidCountException: Method guest() from Mockery_0_Illuminate_Auth_AuthManager should be called
exactly 1 times but called 0 times.
—
There was 1 failure:
1) PagesControllerTest::testHomeWhenUserIsAuthenticatedThenRedirectToDashboard
Failed asserting that two strings are equal.
--- Expected
+++ Actual
## ##
-'http://localhost/dashboard/overview'
+'http://localhost/welcome'
My questions are:
Two similar test cases but why the error output differs? First one the mock Auth::guest() is not called while the second one seems to be called.
On the second test case, why does it fail?
Is there any way to write better tests for my code above? Or even better code to test.
Above test cases, I use Mockery to mock the AuthManager, but if I use the facade Auth::shoudReceive()->once()->andReturn(), then it works eventually. Is there any different between Mockery and Auth::mock facade here?
Thanks.
You're actually mocking a new instance of the Illuminate\Auth\AuthManager and not accessing the Auth facade that is being utilized by your function getHome(). Ergo, your mock instance will never get called. (Standard disclaimer that none of the following code is tested.)
Try this:
public function testHomeWhenUserIsNotAuthenticatedThenRedirectToWelcome() {
Auth::shouldReceive('guest')->once()->andReturn(true);
$this->call('GET', '/');
$this->assertRedirectedToRoute('general.welcome');
}
public function testHomeWhenUserIsAuthenticatedThenRedirectToDashboard() {
Auth::shouldReceive('guest')->once()->andReturn(false);
$this->call('GET', '/');
$this->assertRedirectedToRoute('dashboard.overview');
}
If you check out Illuminate\Support\Facades\Facade, you'll see that it takes care of mocking for you. If you really wanted to do it the way that you were doing it (creating an instance of mock instance of Auth), you'd have to somehow inject it into the code under test. I believe that it could be done with something like this assuming that you extend from the TestCase class provided by laravel:
public function testHomeWhenUserIsNotAuthenticatedThenRedirectToWelcome() {
$this->app['auth'] = $auth = m::mock('Illuminate\Auth\AuthManager');
// above line will swap out the 'auth' facade with your facade.
$auth->shouldReceive('guest')->once()->andReturn(true);
$this->call('GET', '/');
$this->assertRedirectedToRoute('general.welcome');
}
I'm running into a Laravel 4 testing issue: An action/route test can only be run once, and it has to be the first test run. Any subsequent action/route test will fail with an exception before the assert is called.
route/action tests run as long as they are the first test run.
Non-route/action tests run normally, although they cause subsequent route/action tests to throw an exception
It's important to note that the tests in question don't fail, they throw an exception when the action is fired, for example:
Symfony\Component\Routing\Exception\RouteNotFoundException: Unable to generate a URL for the named route "home" as such route does not exist.
Sample test class:
class ExampleTest extends TestCase {
// passes
public function testOne()
{
$class = MyApp::ApiResponse();
$this->assertInstanceOf('\MyApp\Services\ApiResponse', $class);
}
// this fails unless moved the top of the file
public function testRoute()
{
$this->route('GET','home');
$this->assertTrue($this->client->getResponse()->isOk());
}
// passes
public function testTwo()
{
$class = MyApp::ProjectService();
$this->assertInstanceOf('\MyApp\Services\ProjectService', $class);
}
}
This is implementation-specific, a fresh Laravel 4 project does not exhibit the issue. What could be causing this behaviour? How would you go about tracking down the problem?
In this case, the routes file was being called using an include_once call. When subsequent tests were run the routes were empty.
Changing to include() fixed the issue exhibited in the question
I'm attempting to test a typical controller flow for user login. There are extended relations, as with most login systems, and the Grails documentation is completely useless. It doesn't have a single example that is actually real-world relevant for typical usage and is a feature complete example.
my test looks like this:
#TestFor(UserController)
class UserControllerTests extends GroovyTestCase {
void testLogin() {
params.login = [email: "test1#example.com", password: "123"]
controller.login()
assert "/user/main" == response.redirectUrl
}
}
The controller does:
def login() {
if (!params.login) {
return
}
println("Email " + params.login.email)
Person p = Person.findByEmail(params?.login?.email)
...
}
which fails with:
groovy.lang.MissingMethodException: No signature of method: immigration.Person.methodMissing() is applicable for argument types: () values: []
The correct data is shown in the println, but the method fails to be called.
The test suite cannot use mocks overall because there are database triggers that get called, the result of which will need to be tested.
The bizarre thing is that if I call the method directly in the test, it works, but calling it in the controller doesn't.
For an update: I regenerated the test directly from the grails command, and it added the #Test annotation:
#TestFor(UserController)
class UserControllerTests extends GroovyTestCase {
#Test
void testLogin() {
params.login = [email: "test1#example.com", password: "123"]
Person.findByEmail(params.login.email)
controller.login()
}
}
This works if I run it with
grail test-app -integration UserController
though the result isn't populated correctly - the response is empty, flash.message is null even though it should have a value, redirectedUrl is null, content body is empty, and so is view.
If I remove the #TestFor annotation, it doesn't work even in the slightest. It fails telling me that 'params' doesn't exist.
In another test, I have two methods. The first method runs, finds Person.findAllByEmail(), then the second method runs and can't find Person.findAllByEmail and crashes with a similar error - method missing.
In another weird update - it looks like the response object is sending back a redirect, but to the application baseUrl, not to the user controller at all.
Integration tests shouldn't use #TestFor. You need to create an instance of the controller in your test, and set params in that:
class UserControllerTests extends GroovyTestCase {
void testLogin() {
def controller = new UserController()
controller.params.login = [email:'test1#example.com', password:'123']
controller.login()
assert "/user/main" == controller.response.redirectedUrl
}
}
Details are in the user guide.
The TestFor annotation is used only in unit tests, since this mocks the structure. In the integration tests you have access of the full Grails environment, so there's no need for this mocks. So just remove the annotation and should work.
class UserControllerTests extends GroovyTestCase {
...
}
I currently have a test which tests the presenter I have in the MVP model. On my presenter I have a property which will call into my View, which in my test is mocked out. In the Initialization of my test, after I set my View on the Presenter to be the mocked View, I set my property on the Presenter which will call this method.
In my test I do not have an Expect.Call for the method I invoke, yet when I run I get this Rhino mock exception:
Rhino.Mocks.Exceptions.ExpectationViolationException: IView.MethodToInvoke(); Expected #1, Actual #0..
From what I understand with Rhino mocks, as long as I am invoking on the Mock outside the expecting block it should not be recording this. I would imagine the test to pass. Is there a reason it is not passing?
Below is some code to show my setup.
public class Presenter
{
public IView View;
public Presenter(IView view)
{
View = view
}
private int _property;
public int Property
get { return _property;}
set
{
_property = value;
View.MethodToInvoke();
}
}
... Test Code Below ...
[TestInitialize]
public void Initilize()
{
_mocks = new MockRepository();
_view = _mocks.StrictMock<IView>();
_presenter = new Presenter(_view);
_presenter.Property = 1;
}
[TestMethod]
public void Test()
{
Rhino.Mocks.With.Mocks(_mocks).Expecting(delegate
{
}).Verify(delegate
{
_presenter.SomeOtherMethod();
});
}
Why in the world would you want to test the same thing each time a test is run?
If you want to test that a specific thing happens, you should check that in a single test.
The pattern you are using now implies that you need to
- set up prerequisites for testing
- do behavior
- check that behavior is correct
and then repeat that several times in one test
You need to start testing one thing for each test, and that help make the tests clearer, and make it easier to use the AAA syntax.
There's several things to discuss here, but it certainly would be clearer if you did it something like:
[TestMethod]
ShouldCallInvokedMethodWhenSettingProperty()
{
var viewMock = MockRepository.GenerateMock<IView>()
var presenter = new Presenter(viewMock);
presenter.Property = 1;
viewMock.AssertWasCalled(view => view.InvokedMethod());
}
Read up more on Rhino Mocks 3.5 syntax here: http://ayende.com/Wiki/Rhino+Mocks+3.5.ashx
What exactly are you trying to test in the Test method?
You should try to avoid using strict mocks.
I suggest using the Rhino's AAA syntax (Arrange, Act, Assert).
The problem lied with me not understanding the record/verify that is going on with Strict mocks. In order to fix the issue I was having this is how I changed my TestInitilize function. This basicaly does a quick test on my intial state I'm setting up for all my tests.
[TestInitialize]
public void Initilize()
{
_mocks = new MockRepository();
_view = _mocks.StrictMock<IView>();
_presenter = new Presenter(_view);
Expect.Call(delegate { _presenter.View.InvokedMethod(); });
_mocks.ReplayAll();
_mocks.VerifyAll();
_mocks.BackToRecordAll();
_presenter.Property = 1;
}