I am trying to find a way to create custom suites of NUnit tests to target our wide variety of environments. The closest thing I found was this http://nunit.org/docs/2.5.6/suite.html which is exactly what I am looking for. Tying to implement this though, the [Suite] annotation doesnt even seem to exist.. Was this taken away? Is there a better solution now?
The SuiteAttribute was eliminated in NUnit 3. It never got a lot of use as most people simply organize their tests by namespace, which provides the same grouping of tests that the SuiteAttribute used to do.
FUN FACT: "Automatic namespace suites" were once a new cool thing!
If you want the ability to group tests in different ways, across namespace boundaries, you can use categories to do it. It's not as easy of course.
An alternative, if you are using the command-line console runner, is to list the fixtures you want to run in a file and use the --testlist option.
Building off of Charlies post from above - The way I was able to set this up was using the --testlist option.
First create a testlist.txt file and store it somewhere in your solution. Structure the file in such a way so if you have a class like.
namespace NamespaceA
{
class TestGroup
{
[Test]
public void TestOne()
{
}
[Test]
public void TestTwo()
{
}
}
}
the files contents would look like this..
NamespaceA.TestGroup.TestOne
or for both..
NamespaceA.TestGroup
Then just your standard consule runner command
"nunit-console.exe" "path/to/.dll" --testlist="path/to/testlist.txt"
:D)
Related
I am new to dagger and I am searching for how can we implement functionality like spring profiles in dagger-2.x. I want different beans for my devo and prod environments, but I am using dagger framework with Java.
#Provides
#Singleton
public void providesDaggerCoffeeShopClient(Stage stage) {
DaggerCoffeeShop.builder()
.dripCoffeeModule(new DripCoffeeModule())
.qualifier(stage)
.build();
}
Here, I want to skip this bean creation if stage is "Devo". Any help will be appreciated.
Well. I have met this question 2 days ago. And since performed research about this matter. I was looking for a solution that would allow me to be able to run application with different profiles passed as a system property on the application run like:
java -Denv=local-dev-env -jar java-app.jar
The only appropriate solution I was able to find is to follow the oficial documentation testing guide:
https://dagger.dev/dev-guide/testing
and devide my one module into different modules, in particular I had to separate and substitute data base dependency when I want to run my app locally avoiding connection to real DB and executing any command against real DB.
And when I run my app I perform check on system property like:
public boolean isLocalDevEnv() {
return Environments.LOCAL_DEV.envName.equals(System.getProperty("env", Environments.PRODUCTION.envName));
}
and if the system property DOES NOT contain the property I am looking for, then I
create the PRODUCTION instance of my component (that is configured to use production modules):
DaggerMyAppComponent.create()
Which approximately looks like:
#Component(modules = {MyAppModule.class, DaoModule.class})
#Singleton
public interface MyAppComponent {...}
otherwise, I create loca-dev-env version of the component that uses the version of the module that produces mock of Dao that would be creating real connection to real Data Base otherwise:
DaggerMyAppLocalDevEnvComponent.create()
Which approximately looks like:
#Component(modules = {MyAppModule.class, DaoMockModule.class})
#Singleton
public interface MyAppLocalDevEnvComponent {...}
Hope it was clear, so just think of Spring Profiles for dagger 2 from the perspective of system properties and programmatic decision making. This approach definitely requires ALOT of boilerplate code in comparison to Spring's Profiles implementation, but it is the only viable approach I was able to come up with.
Hope it helps.
In Cucumber (the ruby version) you can easily call steps from other steps and thus build hierarchical libraries of steps making it easy to write the Gherkin feature specifications in the most generic terms.
However it is not readily apparent how to do this in Cucumber-JVM and I have been unable to find documentation for it.
Let me be clear I am not interested in calling the step implementation function directly because I don't want to have to know what its signature is, nor to change the call every time the implementation changes.
Rather, I want to pass an arbitrary string that will go through the regex matcher and automatically find the matching step and execute it. Just as the engine runs all steps.
simple example of what I would expect syntax to look like to define synonym "logout":
When("user logs out") { () =>
d.executeScript("logout();")
}
When("logout") { () =>
Step("user logs out")
}
This functionality is not supported in Cucumber-JVM. (Note that the Cucumber Backgrounder document you link in your question describes using Steps within Steps as "an anti-pattern")
Essentially, we believe that Cucumber is a collaboration tool and that Gherkin is not a programming language.
You can see a longer discussion of how we arrived at this decision here
To call steps within step definitions, inherit cuke4duke.Steps in java
import cuke4duke.StepMother;
import cuke4duke.Steps;
import cuke4duke.annotation.I18n.EN.When;
public class CallingSteps extends Steps {
public CallingSteps(StepMother stepMother) {
super(stepMother);
}
#When("^I call another step$")
public void iCallAnotherStep() {
Given("it is magic"); // This will call a step defined somewhere else.
}
}
Example:
https://github.com/cucumber-attic/cuke4duke/blob/master/examples/java/src/test/java/simple/CallingSteps.java
Note: cuke4duke support scala as well
Calling steps within steps is a terrible anti-pattern that can easily be replaced by something much simpler.
Instead of one step calling another step, have both steps call the same helper method.
If you apply this pattern with rigour you and up with
step definitions that are all just single calls to helper methods
a suite of helper methods that collectively provide a test-api
The art of elegantly implementing your Cucumber scenarios now becomes a known programming problem as all your functionality is now directly in code in your programming language rather than being in some restrictive construct specific to Cucumber.
You can now
refactor your helper methods to provide cleaner interaces
use parameters to give methods greater power
use naming to give all your calls greater clarity
use a helper method as an entry point to a suite of extra functionality
use delegation to move functionality out of helper methods and into test service objects
...
Providing this separation can be initially challenging if you are not a programmer or not experienced in the particular programming language in use. However once you get past this initial hurdle the code you can and should produce will be much easier to work with than the tangled mess that inevitably occurs with step nesting.
In Cucumber each Step is a Method. That way, you can call other methods in any step that you want.
#When("^click on \"([^\"]*)\"$")
public void clickOn(String arg1) throws Throwable {
driver.findElement(By.linkText(arg1)).click();
}
#Then("^should see the static elements changing$")
public void shouldSeeTheStaticElementsChanging() throws Throwable {
clickOn();
}
I am using junit with eclipse to write function tests.
When running an individual test it runs in the order that I have them set within the class.
Eg.
testCreateUser
testJoinUserToRoom
testVerify
testDeleteUser
However when I run this test as part of a suite, (so in a package) the order is random.
It will for example do the verify, then delete user then joinuserToRoom then Createuser.
My tests within the suite are not dependent on each other. However each individual test within a test is dependent on them being run in the correct order.
Is there any way I can achieve this?
Thanks.
You can't guarantee the order of execution of test methods in JUnit.
The order of execution of test classes within a suite is guaranteed (if you're using Suite), but the order of execution if the test classes are found by reflection isn't (for instance, if you're running a package in Eclipse, or a set of tests from maven or ant). This may be definable by ant or maven, but it isn't defined by JUnit.
In general, JUnit executes the test methods in the order in which they are defined in the source file, but not all JVMs guarantee this (particulary with JVM 7). If some of the methods are inherited from an abstract base test class, then this may not hold either. (This sounds like your case, but I can't tell from your description).
For more information on this, see my answer to Has JUnit4 begun supporting ordering of test? Is it intentional?.
So what can you do to fix your problem? There are two solutions.
In your original example, you've actually only got one test (verify), but you've got 4 methods, two setup (createUser, joinUserToRoom) and one teardown (deleteUser). So your first option is to better define your test cases, using a TestRule, in particular ExternalResource. ExternalResource allows you to define before/after behaviour for a test, similar to #Before/#After. However, the advantage of ExternalResource is that you can factor this out of your test.
So, you would create/delete the user in your external resource:
public class UsesExternalResource {
#Rule
public ExternalResource resource= new ExternalResource() {
#Override
protected void before() throws Throwable {
// create user
};
#Override
protected void after() {
// destroy user
};
};
#Test
public void testJoinUserToRoom() {
// join user to room
// verify all ok
}
}
For me, this is simpler and easier to understand, and you get independent tests, which is a good thing. This is what I would do, but you will need to refactor your tests a bit. You can also stack these Rules using RuleChain.
Your second option, if you really want to introduce dependencies between your test methods, is to look at TestNG, in which you can define dependencies from one test to another.
If they have a 'correct' order, then they are not multiple tests, but a single test that you have incorrectly annotated as being multiple independent tests.
Best practise would to rewrite them in approved junit style (setup - act - verify), supported by #Before or #BeforeClass methods that did any required common setup.
Quick workaround would be to have a single #Test-annotated method that called the other test methods in sequence. That becomes something like the preferred alternative if you are using Junit not to do strict unit testing, but something more like scenario-driven systems testing. It's not necessarily the best tool for such use, but it does work perfectly well in some cases.
Then, what you would have so far is have a single test:
#Test public void testUserNominalLifeCycle(...
which could then, if you are feeling virtuous, be supplemented by extra new tests like
#Test public void testUserWhoNeverJoinsARoom(...
I have a list of several thousand NUnit tests that I want to run (generated automatically by another tool). (This is a subset of all of the tests, and changes frequently)
I'd like to be able to run these via NUnit-Console.exe. Unfortunately the /run option only takes a direct list of files which in my case would not fit on a single command line. I'd like it to pickup the list from a filename.
I appreciate that I could use categories, but the list I want to run changes frequently and so I'd prefer not to have to start changing source code.
Does anyone know if there is a clean way to get NUnit to run my specified tests?
(I could break it down into a series of smaller calls to NUnit-console with a full command line, but that's not very elegant)
(If it's not possible, maybe I should add it as an NUnit feature request.)
Had a reply from Charlie Poole (from NUnit development team), that this is not currently possible but has been added as a feature request for NUnit 2.6
I see what you're saying, but like you say you can run a single fixture from the command line.
nunit-console /fixture:namespace.fixture tests.dll
How about generating all the tests in the same fixture? Or place them all in the same assembly?
nunit-console tests.dll
As mentioned in the nunitLink, we need to mention the scenario/test case name. It simple but it has bit of a trick in it. Directly mentioning the test case name will not serve the purpose and you will end up with the 0 testcases executed. We need to write the exact path for the same.
I don't know how it works for other languages but using c# I have found a solution. Whenever we create a feature file corresponding feature.cs file get's created in Visual Studio. Click on the featureFileName.feature.cs and look for namespace and keep it aside(Part 1)
namespace MMBank.Test.Features
Scroll a bit down you will get the class name. Note that as well and keep it aside(Part 2)
public partial class HistoricalTransactionFeature
Keep scrolling down, you will see the code which nunit understands for execution basically.
[NUnit.Framework.TestAttribute()]
[NUnit.Framework.DescriptionAttribute("TC_1_A B C D")]
[NUnit.Framework.CategoryAttribute("MM_Bank")]
Below the code you can see the function/method name which will most likely be TC_1_ABCD(certain parameters)
public virtual void TC_1_ABCD(string username, string password, string visit)
You will be having multiple such methods based on no. of scenarios you have in your feature file. Note the method(test case) which you want to execute and keep it aside(Part 3)
Now collate all the parts with dots. Finally you will land up with something like this,
MMBank.Test.Features.HistoricalTransactionFeature.TC_1_ABCD
This is it. Similarly you can create the test case names from multiple feature files and stack them up in text file. Every test case name should be in different line. For command you can browse through above nunit link for execution using command prompt.
More than once the question has been asked on SO. But the only answers that are given read "you should not need to order your unit tests, it is bad because" or "you can avoid that if..."
I already know it is bad, why it is bad, and techniques to avoid it. But that is not what I want to know. I'd like to know if it is possible to order the execution of NUnit tests, other than an alphabetical order. To be blunt: I actually want state to propogate from one test to the next. Trust me that I have a clever reason for this, that defies the usual philosophy.
MSTest has the "ordered test" capability, which is very useful in certain cases. I'd like to have that ability in NUnit. Can it be done?
Update for NUnit 3.2.0 - now it support OrderAttribute.
The OrderAttribute may be placed on a test method to specify the order in which tests are run.
Example:
public class MyFixture
{
[Test, Order(1)]
public void TestA() { ... }
[Test, Order(2)]
public void TestB() { ... }
[Test]
public void TestC() { ... }
}
https://github.com/nunit/docs/wiki/Order-Attribute
The work-around (hack) is to alphabetize your test case names. See this thread:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/nunit-3.0/+bug/740539
Relying on alphabetical order is a workaround that you can use but it is not documented and supported beyond the visual order of the display. In theory it could change at any time. In practice it won't change until NUnit 3.0, so you're pretty safe using it as a workaround
This quote is from Charlie Poole, the main dev on NUnit.
It also seems they have a scheme cooking to support ordered tests in NUnit 3, though how they will do so is still under discussion.
Just an update for NUnit 2.5.1. According to documentation there are cases that even alphabetical order is not supported.
NUnit TestCaseAttribute
Order of Execution
In NUnit 2.5, individual test cases are sorted alphabetically and
executed in that order. With NUnit 2.5.1, the individual cases are not
sorted, but are executed in the order in which NUnit discovers them.
This order does not follow the lexical order of the attributes and
will often vary between different compilers or different versions of
the CLR.
As a result, when TestCaseAttribute appears multiple times on a method
or when other data-providing attributes are used in combination with
TestCaseAttribute, the order of the test cases is undefined.
Try to use NameParameters argument to pass the TestName with a string you wish, in order the TestCase() to be ordered by TestName.
[TestCase(..., TestName = "1stTest")]
[TestCase(..., TestName = "2ndTest")]
for Nuint you can use following code .
[TestMethod]
[Priority(2)]