Unittesting Matlab System Block - matlab

I want to develop some "Matlab System Blocks". For testing their functionality and debugging their code I would like to Unittest them. The method, that I want to test is the "stepImpl" method of the "Matlab System Block".
Unfortunately the "stepImpl" method is a protected method so I can't Unittest them. I know an alternative is to implement the method in other file as a public method or in the "Matlab System Block" as public Method and use this method in the "stepImpl" Method. I already tried to make the "stepImpl" Method public, but this gave me an error.
However I'm hoping for a better way of Unittesting the "Matlab System Block". Are their any best practises or guidelines?

Related

Ansible CallbackBase result object content

Our dev team provides us an Ansible package to work with. I noticed thy develop a custom stdout_callback and I'm trying to understand it.
I'm looking at the code of the class CallbackBase available here and I noticed the result variable but I can't find a description of it's content.
Is there a place I can find such information?
Next question, how does Ansible call such callback? CallbackBase contains several methods but I'd like to know where those methods are called.
Thanks for your feedbacks

Is there a shortcut to copy a method to the interface?

I rather like the "Extract Interface..." refactoring function when working on a class, but it only allows you to extract to a new interface. I was wondering if there was a similar option that allowed the user to copy a method(s) to an interface(s) that the current class already implements.
It's something that would save me a lot of time but despite thinking I may have done something like that before, I can't find any reference to such a function. Does anyone know if it even exists?
This refactoring is called "pull up method." You can move a method to a superclass, or add its declaration to any of the interfaces a class implements.

Is there a tool to convert my GWT RemoteServiceServlet into the correct Service and ServiceAsync interfaces?

I'm working on a GWT project and I find it very tedious to have to add a function to my servlet, then copy and paste the function signature into my Service interface, then copy and paste it into my ServiceAsync interface and change the return parameter to be a callback. Is there a tool or a setting where I can just add public methods to my class and they can get copied into the other interfaces? Even if its not automatic it would be nice to be able to select specific methods and have them copied automatically.
I'm using eclipse and ideally it would update my interface each time I save implementation since thats when it checks my code and complains that my changes break the interface.
If you add the method to your *Service interface, then Eclipse can auto-generate the method ("Add unimplemented methods...") in your *ServiceImpl servlet, which you can then just fill in. Also, if you've got the Google Eclipse plugin installed, it will underline the new method in your *Service interface and complain that it's not in the *ServiceAsync. It might have a CTRL + 1 option to generate it in that interface as well.
You don't really need a tool. Just factor out the many RPC methods by just one method that takes a Request/Response. all you need to do is create subclasses of Request/Response and you don't need to think about adding new methods in the 2 interfaces.
You can use Google Guice on the server side to map the incomming request to a class handling the call... or you could use a visitor approach to forward the incoming request to the code handling the request (without resorting on a big instanceof construct).
Instantiations WindowBuilder GWT Designer does exactly what you are looking for.
The RemoteService Wizard will create all three files at the same time as well as keep them in sync as you make changes.
http://www.instantiations.com/windowbuilder/gwtdesigner/index.html
FWIW - I am only a user/purchaser of this product. I am not employed or in any other way related to Instantiations.

SDL.NET (VB/C#): What should the startup object and application type be?

I eventually couldn't get any further with my program due to the various shortcomings of VB.NET (bad audio support, no reading events in the middle of execution, very weak keyboard input, etc). So I tried SDL.NET 6.1.
Despite its terrible documentation, I was able to fix my code to use it and I love it!
But there's a problem. I don't know how to set up my application settings for it. The Startup Object definitely should be a class (the examples always are in classes, never modules), but a startup class specifically has to be a form! This is bad because SDL makes its own window via SetVideoMode; you don't need a form. So when the form constructor New() finishes, a useless form is created and you have two windows.
I tried placing a call to the game engine loop within New() so that the game starts up without New() ever finishing. The game runs normally, and this solves the "second window" problem... but it can't be closed! X button does nothing, calls to Events.QuitApplication or Me.Close are blatantly ignored, etc.
I'm stumped. It seems I need to set a non-form class as the startup object, but it won't let me.
Oh, by the way, it seems that there are two things called "SDL NET". To clarify, I'm using this one, which exists in the SdlDotNet namespace.
Oh, I forgot to mention, I also noticed that a lot of the examples have a line that says "[STAThread]". Is this is important?
EDIT:
I've already received and accepted an answer for my question, but I want to tell other people what the problem is with exiting/closing the app, even though that wasn't my question:
While SDL.NET allows you to receive input and run other events without having to stop running logic, the application still cannot quit while logic is being run. So I find the best way to tell your SDL.NET application to Quit in the middle of running logic is to use the following TWO lines:
SdlDotNet.Core.Events.QuitApplication
End
Place these in the handler for the SdlDotNet.Core.Events.Quit event, as well as anywhere else you want your program to quit.
The Startup Object definitely should be a class (the examples always are in classes, never modules)
Here's your mistake. There's no real difference between a class and a VB module from CLR perspective. So just make it a module with Main and go on. There is no need for a class. I suspect you're looking at C# examples, which use classes - but that's because there is no such thing as a module in C#.
[STAThread] probably won't make any difference for SDL. It is important for UI applications (both WinForms and WPF require it), but I don't think that SDL does any COM calls, so it shouldn't care whether your thread is STA or not. It's just something that Visual Studio puts on Main in new projects by default.

GWT Composite best practices

I'm learning GWT and have started to get the hang of it. I'm at the point where my code is getting to be a spaghetti mess so I'm going back and factoring reasonable bits of it out as Composites. The first problem I ran into was that my tool support failed to give the new Composite class an initWidget() method. It did include a default constructor.
For the time being, I've simply filled in my overridden initWidget() method with a call to super(initWidget(w)) My project compiles and runs as expected, though I feel as though I must be missing something.
What should I keep in mind when overriding init and what if anything do i need to place in the constructor. Is there anything else that I need to know or does it just boil down to regular old Java after this?
Clarification - It has occurred to me that there are probably different answers to this question depending on whether you intend to release said Composite classes as part of a library or simply part of your stand-alone app. I in particular have no intention at this time of developing externally useful components (mainly because I'm so green in this particular technology.)
Thanks!
I'm not sure if I understand what you are trying to do. But for all the Composite's I've written I've never overridden the initWidget method. Because Composite itself doesn't need to be initialized with a constructor, i.e. no need to call super() my constructors of widgets extending composite look something like:
public mywidget() {
SomePanel p = new SomePanel();
....
initWidget(p);
}
As a best practice, imo, only the widget extending Composite should call it's 'own' initWidget.
"GWT Conference: Best Practices for Building Libraries" gives a couple of tips. You should also look at the source of GWT and at the source of one of the libraries for GWT (like gwt-ext)
[EDIT] I just saw another option: suco. From the description:
A micro library that helps to maintain your GWT client code clean and modular.