testsupport | Ministry Test Support Libraries is to provide a suite | Mock library
kandi X-RAY | testsupport Summary
kandi X-RAY | testsupport Summary
The aim of the Ministry Test Support Libraries is to provide a suite of Fakes, Mocks and assertion classes that make the process of testing easier. This is not exclusively for unit testing either, the libraries also support console automation testing. The Ministry.TestSupport code is split into separate libraries sharing the same namespaces. The primary library, Ministry.TestSupport deals directly with any core functionality without any mocking consideration whilst the secondary libraries add features that require a mocking consideration. Initially, the library Ministry.TestingSupport.Moq provides functionality requiring mocking consideration for Moq. If you're interested in similar functionality for your mocking framework of choice please join the project - The code has been built with extensibility of other mocking frameworks in mind. I would like to offer Ministry.TestingSupport.Rhino and Ministry.TestingSupport.NSubstitute at some point in the future. ##ISupportFactory## Most of this functionality is ether accessed via base classes or via an implementation of ISupportFactory. The ISupportFactory interface exposes the accessible instances for a given test usage implementation at the lowest possible level. The base interface looks like this... Implementations are available in both NUnit and MSTest flavours, providing an implementation of the AssertionFramework for each particular unit testing framework. The higher level libraries expose a more detailed interface called ISupportFactoryWithMocks that allows instantiation of other dependent testing elements... The implementations of the interface also inherit from their lower level counterparts. This allows a clean separation between elements that require a mocking context and those that don't. The following functionality is offered by the libraries... Although only several key assertions are supported (feel free to join the project and add some more of your own!), all of the key functionality within the testing support libraries is accessed by an implementation of the IAssertionFramework interface... The IAssertionFramework interface allows the actual testing framework used to be abstracted out until the point at which the actual test is written. At the time of writing there are two implementations included for this interface, one for NUnit and one for MSTest (located in the NUnit and MSTest namespaces respectively). Support for other frameworks may be added later, but it is a goal of the project to maintain feature parity for both NUnit and MSTest throughout and to minimise code duplication. Abstracting the framework enables this goal. The assertion framework implementation can either be instantiated directly or via an implementation of the ISupportFactory interface. ###New Assertions### The assertion abstraction also introduces the 'AreCaseInsensitiveEqual' assertion, which allows you to assert that two objects are identical by their string representation regardless of case. This makes writing tests for things like MVC Routing a lot smaller. ##Console Automation Testing## Console automation testing is a relatively simple concept. Similar to UI automation testing but the only thing to test is the execution of a command and what happens as a result. This usually involves interrogating the screen output. Console automation is achieved by way of inheriting from the ConsoleTestBase class in Ministry.TestSupport. When inheriting you must override the TestSupportFactory property and the FixtureSetUp method, ensuring that it is called at the beginning of the fixture or test. ###Differing Frameworks### Managing this process in the different frameworks is slightly different due to execution orders. To make things easier there is an MSTestConsoleTestBase and NUnitConsoleTestBase class in the respective framework namespaces to make the process easier. ###Creating an Automated Test### This simply involves creating a test class that inherits from the base class for the framework you intend to use. This will then give you access to all of the properties and methods to manipulate the underlying application (specified by overriding the AppName property). Sample code is given for each test in the source code under 'tests'. NUnit... [TestFixture] public class ConsoleTestClass : NUnitConsoleTestBase { [Test] public void TestTrue() { AssertApplicationRunsSuccessfully(); Assert.IsTrue(true); }. ###Key Properties & Methods### The following properties & methods are key... ###Custom Assertions### The base class also provides some custom assertions to make the process even easier... ##Mocking HttpContext## Mocking HttpContext is a persistent problem for web developers. Ministry.TestSupport.Moq offers a very simple mocking solution for HttpContext. It's fairly limited but should suffice in 80% of cases. ###MockHttpContext### The library contains objects for MockHttpContext, MockHttpRequest and MockHttpResponse. These are managed through various optional constructors. The classes inherit from Mock directly enabling to to adapt the retained objects to setup any specific additional mocking and verification that you need. The returned Mock objects contain collections and mthods to mock and stub common elements of context. Please raise an issue if you find a test need that this doesn't cover, as I'd like to expand this to cover as much as possible. The MockHttpContext object also has an 'ApplyTo' method so you can add it to a controller when testing MVC controllers. For example... ##Testing Routes in ASP.Net MVC## Ministry.TestingSupport offers a simple solution to make route testing, for both incoming and outgoing routes, really clean and simple. This is achieved through the use of two classes. The primary class is the 'MvcRouteAsserter', an instance of which is provided by the ISupportFactoryWithMocks implementation for your chosen testing framework. Moq is required for this to work at the moment but if you would like this for your chosen mocking framework feel free to join the project and add support or raise an issue and I'll add support when I can. ###The MvcRouteAsserter### This is a straightforward class which simply takes an instance of IAssertionFramework and then wraps up a suite of assertions you would normally perform to test a route into one simple assertion. Assertions provided include... ###RouteTestBase### Creating a route test is very straightforward. By inheriting from TouteTestBase, you get shorthand local assertion methods that call through to the MvcRouteAsserter. There are some key things to do to set up a route test for your application, as follows... ###Creating your own base class### It makes a lot of sense to create your own base class for route tests, inheriting from RouteTestBase. Here's my base class for the Ministry website... This then makes the test classes themselves really clean and readable. Here's my own NUnit tests...
Support
Quality
Security
License
Reuse
Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA
Currently covering the most popular Java, JavaScript and Python libraries. See a Sample of testsupport
testsupport Key Features
testsupport Examples and Code Snippets
Community Discussions
Trending Discussions on Mock
QUESTION
Say that I have the following interface:
...ANSWER
Answered 2022-Mar-26 at 16:40First of all, you may want to use AutoMoqDataAttribute to create a mock of the ITeam
interface:
QUESTION
I have been using github actions for quite sometime but today my deployments started failing. Below is the error from github action logs
...ANSWER
Answered 2022-Mar-16 at 07:01First, this error message is indeed expected on Jan. 11th, 2022.
See "Improving Git protocol security on GitHub".
January 11, 2022 Final brownout.
This is the full brownout period where we’ll temporarily stop accepting the deprecated key and signature types, ciphers, and MACs, and the unencrypted Git protocol.
This will help clients discover any lingering use of older keys or old URLs.
Second, check your package.json
dependencies for any git://
URL, as in this example, fixed in this PR.
As noted by Jörg W Mittag:
For GitHub Actions:There was a 4-month warning.
The entire Internet has been moving away from unauthenticated, unencrypted protocols for a decade, it's not like this is a huge surprise.Personally, I consider it less an "issue" and more "detecting unmaintained dependencies".
Plus, this is still only the brownout period, so the protocol will only be disabled for a short period of time, allowing developers to discover the problem.
The permanent shutdown is not until March 15th.
As in actions/checkout issue 14, you can add as a first step:
QUESTION
Wondering if anybody has some good suggestions on how to crack this. Got this test helper utils I have added some types to:
...ANSWER
Answered 2022-Mar-20 at 22:37If you look at React without JSX, you'll see that the XML-inspired syntax () is just short for
React.createElement('MockComponent')
.
Right now, if you renamed mockComponent
to MockComponent
and tried using the angle bracket syntax, the first issue is that your function receives two arguments. React components are either class components that take one constructor argument (props) or functional components that take one argument (again, props). The second issue is that your function returns a React functional component, when it needs to return a rendered React element.
One way to fix this issue is to convert mockComponent
into a React functional component and make module
and propOverride
props of the FC.
QUESTION
I am upgrading my C#
function app from .net 3.1 to 6.0`.
When I run my test cases, I found that, 1 of my test case failed with the below error.
Castle.DynamicProxy.InvalidProxyConstructorArgumentsException : Can not instantiate proxy of class: System.Net.HttpWebRequest. Could not find a parameterless constructor.
Basically, I am trying to mock HttpWebRequest and below is my piece of code for that.
...ANSWER
Answered 2022-Feb-23 at 10:53Both HttpWebRequest constructors are obsolete and should not be used. You have to use the static function "Create" to create a new instance of the HttpWebRequest class:
HttpWebRequest myReq = (HttpWebRequest)WebRequest.Create("http://www.contoso.com/");
To solve your issue, use the HttpClient class instead. This class has a parameterless constructor.
QUESTION
I'm currently building PoC Apache Beam pipeline in GCP Dataflow. In this case, I want to create streaming pipeline with main input from PubSub and side input from BigQuery and store processed data back to BigQuery.
Side pipeline code
...ANSWER
Answered 2022-Jan-12 at 13:12Here you have a working example:
QUESTION
I created an extension method to add all JSON configuration files to the IConfigurationBuilder
ANSWER
Answered 2021-Dec-19 at 09:24The logic of comparing files seems alright, I don't find any outstanding problem with it, it is ok to prepend the "/" to match what you need.
Could be even better if you could use the System.IO.Path.DirectorySeparatorChar
for the directory root path as well, so if you run on windows or Linux you will have no issues.
But there may be a conceptual problem with what you are doing. To my understanding you aim to verify existence of specific configuration files required for your program to work right, if those files are missing than the program should fail. But that kind of failure due to missing configuration files, is an expected and valid result of your code. Yet, you unit-test this as if missing files should fail the test, as if missing files are an indication that something wrong with your code, this is wrong.
Missing files are not indication of your code not working correct and Unit-test should not be used as a validator to make sure the files exist prior executing the program, you will likely agree that unit-test is not part of the actual process and it should only aim to test your code and not preconditions, the test should compare an expected result (mock result of your code) vs. actual result and certainly not meant to become part of the code. That unit test looks like a validator that should be in the code.
So unless those files are produced by your specific code (and not the deployment) there is no sense testing that. In such case you need to create a configuration validator code - and your unit test could test that instead. So it will test that the validator expected result with a mock input you provide. But the thing here is that you would know that you only testing the validation logic and not the actual existence of the files.
QUESTION
I would like to have the preview of my HomeScreen
composable function in my HomeScreenPrevieiw
preview function. However this is not being possible to do because I am getting the following error:
ANSWER
Answered 2021-Sep-07 at 16:48This is exactly one of the reasons why the view model is passed with a default value. In the preview, you can pass a test object:
QUESTION
I get a error when i change the version to 0.8 , but works fine with 0.6, how i see the most recent version? , i tried downloaded from npm install @chainlink/contracts --save, but only works with mock mode.
This is my repo: https://github.com/irwingtello/lottery
Compiling contracts... Solc version: 0.8.9 Optimizer: Enabled Runs: 200 EVM Version: Istanbul CompilerError: solc returned the following errors:
ParserError: Source "C:/Users/irwin/.brownie/packages/smartcontractkit/chainlink-brownie-contracts@1.1.1/contracts/src/v0.8/interfaces/AggregatorV3Interface.sol" not found: File not found. --> contracts/Lottery.sol:4:1: | 4 | import "@chainlink/contracts/src/v0.8/interfaces/AggregatorV3Interface.sol"; | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
ERROR: Unable to load project
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Nov-05 at 21:48"As of 1.2.0 and onward all the releases of this package are going to match the @chainlink/contracts
NPM tags
So it will look backwards
, but we are starting with 0.2.1
"
Change: @chainlink=smartcontractkit/chainlink-brownie-contracts@1.1.1
To: @chainlink=smartcontractkit/chainlink-brownie-contracts@0.2.1
https://github.com/smartcontractkit/chainlink-brownie-contracts/tree/v0.2.1
QUESTION
I have a custom hook as below
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Oct-13 at 05:27Because it's a named export you should return an object in the mock
QUESTION
Given a folder structure like such:
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Sep-22 at 07:06Yeah. I also fought with this initially when I learned patching and mocking and know how frustrating it is as you seem to be doing everything right, but it does not work. I sympathise with you!
This is actually how mocking of imported stuff works, and once you realise it, it actually makes sense.
The problem is that import works in the way that it makes the imported module available in the context of where your import is.
Lets' assume your code.py
module is in 'my_package' folder. Your code is available then as my_package.code
. And once you use from dag_common.connections import get_conn
in code
module - the imported get_conn
becomes available as .... my_package.code.get_conn
And in this case you need to patch my_package.code.get_conn
not the original package you imported get_conn from.
Once you realise this, patching becomes much easier.
Community Discussions, Code Snippets contain sources that include Stack Exchange Network
Vulnerabilities
No vulnerabilities reported
Install testsupport
Support
Reuse Trending Solutions
Find, review, and download reusable Libraries, Code Snippets, Cloud APIs from over 650 million Knowledge Items
Find more librariesStay Updated
Subscribe to our newsletter for trending solutions and developer bootcamps
Share this Page