Hot Spots is missing from dotCover Unit Tests Coverage in Rider - plugins

I've installed the dotCover plugin in Jetbrains Rider but Hot Spots is missing from the Unit Test Coverage menu in Rider and I don't have the Coverage Tree either. Anyone know why?
This is what I'm supposed to see:
This is what I have:

Turns out that the Hot Spots functionality doesn't yet exist in Rider. However it is on their radar and a feature request exists for it here:
https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/RIDER-17833/Add-Hot-spots-view

Related

Flutter driver Test Explorer

is there a way to get some kind of Flutter Test Explorer into the IntelliJ IDE?
I am thinking of something like JUnit has in Visual Studio. Let's say that it should be something like this. My tests are stored in Feature Files.
If yes please send me a link to an addon or tool.
Thanks.
EDIT 1:
I am talking about the tool which "sees" all feature files and scenarios in it before the run. User than can select which scenario will be executed from the list of scenarios.
If you run tests in IntelliJ you should see something very similar to what you have screen shotted above for VS. You may find if you're using a build tool (Gradle/Maven) that running tests defaults to using the build tool to do so but you can switch this back to IntelliJ alone. What are you currently seeing/not seeing in IntelliJ?
See https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/performing-tests.html for more info + screen shot very similar to VS.

Play Framework code coverage in Intellij IDEA 14

I've created a simple Play 2.x application in Intellij IDEA 14.1.4 and decided to run tests with code coverage. Here's what I get to choose:
I've tried both options and when I actually run tests with code coverage, I get the following error:
With the first option:
With the second one:
The code of the test was generated by IDEA and I don't think it matters.
As I've found out, the problem might be with my user name, since it contains Russian symbols. The usual test run works perfectly and it only fails when I try to run with code coverage, which proves the username theory.
"C:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.8.0_45\bin\java" -ea "-javaagent:C:\Program Files (x86)\JetBrains\IntelliJ IDEA 14.1.4\plugins\coverage\lib\coverage-agent.jar=C:\Users\пс\AppData\Local\Temp\coverage0args"
C:\Users\пс\
However, I was unable to find the solution since I simply don't know what to look for.

Resharper 9.0 says 'No tests found in selected solution items.' Yet there are over 100 tests

Resharper 9.0 says 'No tests found in selected solution items.' Yet there are over 100 tests.
I right click my solution in Visual Studio 2013 and click the "Run Unit Tests" option near the bottom of the context menu. I get the error message: "No tests found in selected solution items.".
Every once in a while, they do show up and run, but most of the time, they don't show up and I get the error message.
I have NCover installed and it has a 'Bolt Tests' tab from which I can run all the tests. However, I would prefer to run the tests from the main menu using Resharper.
Does anybody know why these tests aren't showing up and how to get them to consistently be discovered?
Thanks,
Curtis
Looks like the latest update of 9.1 solved the problem. Thanks everybody.

Ember-cli: importing blanket.js causes test runners to hang

I'm currently using ember-cli with ember-qUnit for testing. I would also like to add code coverage results to the test output, so after some research blanketjs seemed the way to go. I installed blanket using:
npm install blanket
And moved the blanket folder into the ember-cli vendor folder. As I understand the way to import libraries is through the Brocfile.js which I am doing like so:
app.import('vendor/blanket/dist/qunit/blanket.js');
Using ember inspector it appears that blanket has been imported correctly, and the "enable coverage" checkbox has appeared at the top of the qUnit test results page. However the tests just hang and just say "running". No tests seem to run. When I use:
ember test -server
It says that it is "waiting for runners". Does anyone know what could be going wrong here?
I've looked around and it seems code-coverage with ember-cli is a tricky subject:
Ember CLI Code Coverage Reports
Thanks
I installed it using ember-cli-blanket. I don't think you need to include it in your Brocfile.js, but instead import it in your tests/index.html after you import your test-support.js.
Blanket will probably make your runners hang for a big as it is essentially loading you entire app all over again.
For what it's worth, I haven't been able to get accurate test coverage using this method yet, but it's possibly user error.

NUnit vs MSTest - a fickle TDD novice's experiences with both of them

There are a ton of questions here on SO regarding NUnit vs. MSTest, and I have read quite a few of them. I think my question here is slightly different enough to post separately.
When I started to use C#, I never even considered looking at MSTest because I was so used to not having it available when I was using C++ previously. I basically forgot all about it. :) So I started with NUnit, and loved it. Tests were very easy to set up, and testing wasn't too painful -- just launch the IDE and run the tests!
As many here have pointed out, NUnit has frequent updates, while MSTest is only updated as often as the IDE. That's not necessarily a problem if you don't need to be on the bleeding edge of TDD (which I'm not), but the problem I was having with frequent updates is keeping all of the systems up-to-date. I use about four or five different PCs daily, and while updating all of them isn't a huge deal, I was hoping for a way to make my code compile properly on systems with an older version of NUnit. Since my project referenced the NUnit install folder, when I upgraded the framework, any computers with the older framework installed would no longer be able to compile my project. I tried to combat the problem by created a common folder in SVN that had just the NUnit DLLs, but even then it would somehow complain about the version number of the binary. Is there a way to get around this issue? This is what made me stop using the first time.
Then one day I remembered MSTest, and decided to give it a try. I loved that it was integrated into the IDE. CTRL-R,CTRL-A, all tests run. How simple! But then I saw that the types of tests available in MSTest were pretty limited. I didn't know how many I'd actually really need, but I figured I should go back to NUnit, and I did.
About now I was starting to have to debug unit tests, and the only way I could figure out how to do it in NUnit was to set NUnit as the startup application, then set breakpoints in my tests. Then in the NUnit GUI, I would run the tests to hit the breakpoints. This was a complete PITA. I then looked at the MSTest GUI again, and saw that I could just click Debug there and it would execute my tests! WOW! Now that was the killer feature that swayed me back in favor of MSTest.
Right now, I'm back using MSTest. Unfortunately, today I started to think about daily builds and did some searching on Tinderbox, which is the only tool I had heard of before for this sort of thing. This then opened up my eyes to other tools like buildbot and TFS. So the problem here is that I think MSTest is guaranteed to lock me into TFS for automated daily builds, or continuous integration, or whatever the buzzword is. My company can't afford to get locked into MS-only solutions (other than VS), so I want to examine other choices.
I'm perfectly fine to go back to NUnit. I'm not thrilled about rewriting 100+ unit tests, but that's the way it goes. However, I'd really love for someone to explain how to squash those two issues of mine, which in summary are:
how do I setup NUnit and my project so that I don't have to keep upgrading it on every system to make my project build?
how do I get easier debugging of unit tests? My approach was a pain because I'd have to keep switching between NUnit and the default app to test / run my application. I saw a post here on SO that mentioned NUnitIt on codeplex, but I haven't any experience with it.
UPDATE -- I'm comparing stuff in my development VM, and so far, NUnitit is quite nice. It's easy to install (one click), and I just point it to whatever NUnit binaries are in my SVN externals folder. Not bad! I also went into VS -> Tools -> Options -> Keyboard and changed my mapping for CTRL-R,CTRL-A to map to NUnitit.Connect.DebugGUI. Not perfect since I haven't figured out how to make NUnit automatically run the tests when it's opened, but it's pretty good. And debugging works as it should now!
UPDATE #2 -- I installed TestDriven.Net and gave it a quick run through. Overall, I like it a lot better than NUnitit, but at the moment, NUnitit wins because it's free, and since it also works with NUnit, it will allow me to "upgrade" to TestDriven.Net when the time comes. The thing I like most about TestDriven.Net is that when I double click on the failed test, it takes me right to the line in the test that had failed, while NUnit + NUnitit doesn't seem to be capable of this. Has anyone been able to make this link between the NUnit GUI and the VS IDE happen?
Many projects I've worked on have included a copy of the specific version of NUnit (or xUnit.net, whatever) in a "lib" or "extrernal" or "libraries" folder in their source control, and reference that location for building all of their tests. This greatly reduces the "upgrade everyone" headache, since you really don't need to install NUnit or xUnit.net to use it.
This approach will still let you use something like TestDriven.Net to execute the tests, run the tests in a debugger, etc.
For easier debugging (and running, too) of unit tests I recommend checking out TestDriven.Net. The "Test With > Debugger" feature is so handy. The personal version is free.
Have you played with the "Specific Version" property on the NUnit.framework reference? We keep ours set to true so that the tests that are coded for a given nunit version require that specific version to execute.
I'm not sure how it will handle, for example, if you had 2.5 on your machine but another machine only had 2.4 - would .NET bind to the 2.4 version happily or will it only bind from earlier versions to later versions of an assembly (e.g. compiled against 2.4, but 2.5 availale at runtime?)