kandi X-RAY | mock Summary
kandi X-RAY | mock Summary
gomock is a mocking framework for the Go programming language. It integrates well with Go's built-in testing package, but can be used in other contexts too.
Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA
mock Key Features
mock Examples and Code Snippets
Trending Discussions on mock
Say that I have the following interface:...
ANSWERAnswered 2022-Mar-26 at 16:40
First of all, you may want to use AutoMoqDataAttribute to create a mock of the
I have been using github actions for quite sometime but today my deployments started failing. Below is the error from github action logs...
ANSWERAnswered 2022-Mar-16 at 07:01
First, 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.
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:
Wondering if anybody has some good suggestions on how to crack this. Got this test helper utils I have added some types to:...
ANSWERAnswered 2022-Mar-20 at 22:37
If you look at React without JSX, you'll see that the XML-inspired syntax (
) is just short for
Right now, if you renamed
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
propOverride props of the FC.
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....
ANSWERAnswered 2022-Feb-23 at 10:53
Both 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.
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...
ANSWERAnswered 2022-Jan-12 at 13:12
Here you have a working example:
I created an extension method to add all JSON configuration files to the
ANSWERAnswered 2021-Dec-19 at 09:24
The 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.
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:
ANSWERAnswered 2021-Sep-07 at 16:48
This 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:
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:/Usersemail@example.com/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...
ANSWERAnswered 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
I have a custom hook as below...
ANSWERAnswered 2021-Oct-13 at 05:27
Because it's a named export you should return an object in the mock
Given a folder structure like such:...
ANSWERAnswered 2021-Sep-22 at 07:06
Yeah. 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 ....
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.
No vulnerabilities reported
Reuse Trending Solutions
Subscribe to our newsletter for trending solutions and developer bootcamps
Share this Page