I'm a novice programmer who is very new to both AngularJS and the practice of unit testing. I've spent hours trying to find the solution to this but I'm becoming increasingly more confused. If anyone could point me in the right direction I would greatly appreciate it. I'll try to be as descriptive as possible.
The situation is this:
I have created a service in AngularJS (Service A) that has a couple of functions. Each of these functions makes an $http GET request to a REST API and returns an $http promise object that contains JSON data. Within these functions, the URL is constructed through the implementation of another very simple service (Service B) that has been injected as a dependency into Service A. I have created a mock of Service B to isolate it from all of its dependencies. Both of these services are defined inside of the same module named "services". In this case, there is no real need for this dependency but I just want to understand how it works.
Using Jasmine, I would like to construct a unit test for Service A to ensure that the requests it is making to the API are constructed correctly and possibly if the correct JSON data is being returned. At the same time, I do not want any real API calls to be made.
This is what I know:
$httpBackend mock is what I need to be able to make fake calls to the API and it provides functionality to expect certain requests and return specified results.
I need to test the real Service A and inject the mock I've created of Service B. I know there are ways to do this using Jasmine Spies and $provide. I've also seen examples where sinon.js is used, and I'm not sure which is the best approach.
I will post my source code below, which is written in CoffeeScript.
Service A:
'use strict'
angular.module("services")
.service("ServiceA", ["$http", "ServiceB", ($http, ServiceB) ->
#Uses underscore.js to set this default attribute
defaults = withCredentials:true
getVarset: (itemName, options={}) ->
options.method = "GET"
options.url = ServiceB.makeUrl("item/#{itemName}")
$http _.defaults(options, defaults)
getVarsets: (options = {}) ->
options.method = "GET"
options.url = ServiceB.makeUrl("items")
$http _.defaults(options, defaults)
getModelsForVarset: (itemName, options = {}) ->
options.method = "GET"
options.url = ServiceB.makeUrl("item/#{itemName}/prices")
$http _.defaults(options, defaults)
])
Service B:
'use strict'
angular.module('services')
.service 'ServiceB', [ ->
# Just return the string
# This service builds the real URL, but I've removed this
makeUrl: (Url) ->
"#{Url}"
]
so are you saying that you know how to do this with $provide/Jasmine spies and are looking for alternatives? I've mostly just used the $provide/spy method for mocking and it's worked out really well for me so far.
something like:
beforeEach(function() {
// set up a default value for your mock
bMock = {
makeUrl: jasmine.createSpy('makeUrl() mock').andReturn('http://www....')
}
// use the $provide service to replace ServiceB
// with your mock
module('services', function($provide) {
$provide.value('ServiceB', bMock);
});
});
it('should do what its supposed to do', function() {
// test...
});
then, if you want to use $httpBackend to mock the http requests in service A, you just need to use the $injector service to grab $httpBackend, then call .when(...) on it to set things up, a la http://docs.angularjs.org/api/ngMock.$httpBackend
Related
Here is my endpoint in akka-http:
private val route = Route.asyncHandler(
pathPrefix("v0") {
headerValueByType[JWTTokenObject](()) { jwtHeader =>
mapRequest(authorize(jwtHeader.value)) {
authenticateOrRejectWithChallenge(authenticate(transactionId, _)) { claims =>
pathPrefix("v1"/Segment) { someValue =>
path("v3") {
post {
handleThisPostRequest(someValue)
}
}
}
}
}
}
)
This is one of the POST API which authenticates using JWT 'Bearer' token which is passed as a header value. I want to test this End To End. It is also calling DBs and third party services.
I am trying to add any API test framework so that I will be able to test this on any environments. Can you suggest any framework to achieve this type of integration tests where enviroment variables are involved in calling third party APIs.
Is it possible to test this using spray-testkit(Test API REST SCALA)? An example will be helpful. Thanks
Well, the Akka Testkit(https://doc.akka.io/docs/akka-http/current/routing-dsl/testkit.html) has a wonderful suite for doing route an Actor testing. I would suggest using it.
Take a look to how to handle the Authorization token: https://github.com/akka/akka-http/blob/main/akka-http-tests/src/test/scala/akka/http/scaladsl/server/directives/SecurityDirectivesSpec.scala.
With respect to the environment variables: if you need that in your tests the code needs to call a remote service because is a integration or E2E test, make use of the capabilities of Scala config:
https://github.com/lightbend/config#optional-system-or-env-variable-overrides.
There are a lot of strategies about how to deal with testing in these kind of projects, but, in case ok Akka there are good resources to read about it.
I am using JsonServiceClient in a Xamarin app, like this:
JsonServiceClient client = new JsonServiceClient("https://my.domain.com/");
SetHeaders(client);
var request = ...; // this is IRequest<T>
var result = await client.SendAsync(request); // <-- FAILS, can't find service
My backend returns an answer, saying that there is no service at that endpoint, which is true, the path that was actually sent over the wire is incorrect.
The request is defined in a lib, like so:
[Route("/mybasepath/endpoint", "POST")]
public class Login : IReturn<LoginResponse>
{
}
The problem is the path that is used in the call, which is wrong and does not follow the Route attribute:
https://my.domain.com/json/reply/Login
Here, ServiceStack client uses the default /json/reply path, even though I have the Route attribute defined in the DTO.
If I change the method used on the client instance, and instead use PostAsync, the path is ten correct and the call work as expected:
JsonServiceClient client = new JsonServiceClient("https://my.domain.com/");
SetHeaders(client);
var request = ...; // this is IRequest<T>
var result = await client.PostAsync(request); // <-- WORKS!
I don't have a minimal project right now that can be immediately tested, maybe it is something easy I have missed?
(Using ServiceStack.Client v 5.10.4 on VS 2019 16.9)
If you want to use ServiceStack's generic Send* APIs the Service Clients needs to explicitly infer the Verb to use by annotating the Request DTO with an HTTP Verb Interface Marker, not necessary for AutoQuery or AutoQuery CRUD APIs which is inferred from their base classes.
Otherwise Send* APIs are designed to fallback to use ServiceStack's pre-defined Routes.
I have a .Net Core web API solution called ReportService, which calls another API endpoint (we can call this PayrollService) to get payroll reports. So my requirement is to mock the PayrollService using Wiremock.Net.
Also currently I have a automation test case written, which will directly call the ReportService controller and will execute all the service logic, and also classes which calls PayrollService and the DB layer logic and will get the HTTP result back from the ReportService.
Please note that the Automation test cases is a separate solution. So my requirement is to run the automation test cases like before on ReportService, and the payroll service will be mocked by Wiremock.
So, what are the changes that need to happen in the codebase? Do we have to change the url of the ReportService to be the Wiremock server base url in the ReportService solution? Please let us know, and please use the terms I have used in the question regarding the project names so I am clear.
Your assumption is indeed correct, you have make the base URL which is used by ReportService configurable.
So that for your unit / integration tests you can provide the URL on which the WireMock.Net server is running.
Example:
[Test]
public async Task ReportService_Should_Call_External_API_And_Get_Report()
{
// Arrange (start WireMock.Net server)
var server = WireMockServer.Start();
// Setup your mapping
server
.Given(Request.Create().WithPath("/foo").UsingGet())
.RespondWith(
Response.Create()
.WithStatusCode(200)
.WithBody(#"{ ""msg"": ""Hello world!"" }")
);
// Act (configure your ReportService to connect to the URL where WireMock.Net is running)
var reportService = new ReportService(server.Urls[0]});
var response = reportService.GetResport();
// Assert
Assert.Equal(response, ...); // Verify
}
I have developed a package in flutter, and wanted to test it, which makes a network call.
As we know that all network request while testing will return 404, and such HTTP reqeust needs to be mocked.
However its also possible to use the orginal HTTP clients instead of mocking or getting 404.
https://github.com/flutter/flutter/issues/19086#issuecomment-402639134
How do we do that ?
I have tried this :
main(){
TestWidgetsFlutterBinding.ensureInitialized();
HttpOverrides.runZoned(() {
test("Case1: Make HTTP request to an actual server", ()async{
let a = MyPackage.makesAHTTPRequest();
expect(a,"hello world");
});
}, createHttpClient: (SecurityContext c) => new HttpClient(context: c));
}
My URL is working all fine.
But it keeps giving me 404.
How do one use real HTTP client, if needed that way?
Ok so if any one is facing a similar issue like me use this hack.
You will need to modify your class, in a way that we can inject HTTP clients into it at run time. We will need to modify our test case as such.
import 'package:http/http.dart'; //client is from this pack
Client httpclinet = Client();
var a = MyPackage.makesAHTTPRequest(httpclient);
remove that Httpoverride.runzoned cod, you can pass Client object from http package directly.
Some test case will fail, due to fake asynchronous effect, but you can use timeouts to manage those.
You will also need to remove any such statements:
TestWidgetsFlutterBinding.ensureInitialized();
In my case I added this line as I was loading files from assets, using packages notation, I referenced them locally and removed above ensureInitalized line as well. [Actually I passed flag to use local notation during testing and package notation otherwise]
My middleware need is to:
add an extra query param to requests made by a REST API client derived from GuzzleHttp\Command\Guzzle\GuzzleClient
I cannot do this directly when invoking APIs through the client because GuzzleClient uses an API specification and it only passes on "legal" query parameters. Therefore I must install a middleware to intercept HTTP requests after the API client prepares them.
The track I am currently on:
$apiClient->getHandlerStack()-push($myMiddleware)
The problem:
I cannot figure out the RIGHT way to assemble the functional Russian doll that $myMiddleware must be. This is an insane gazilliardth-order function scenario, and the exact right way the function should be written seems to be different from the extensively documented way of doing things when working with GuzzleHttp\Client directly. No matter what I try, I end up having wrong things passed to some layer of the matryoshka, causing an argument type error, or I end up returning something wrong from a layer, causing a type error in Guzzle code.
I made a carefully weighted decision to give up trying to understand. Please just give me a boilerplate solution for GuzzleHttp\Command\Guzzle\GuzzleClient, as opposed to GuzzleHttp\Client.
The HandlerStack that is used to handle middleware in GuzzleHttp\Command\Guzzle\GuzzleClient can either transform/validate a command before it is serialized or handle the result after it comes back. If you want to modify the command after it has been turned into a request, but before it is actually sent, then you'd use the same method of Middleware as if you weren't using GuzzleClient - create and attach middleware to the GuzzleHttp\Client instance that is passed as the first argument to GuzzleClient.
use GuzzleHttp\Client;
use GuzzleHttp\HandlerStack;
use GuzzleHttp\Command\Guzzle\GuzzleClient;
use GuzzleHttp\Command\Guzzle\Description;
class MyCustomMiddleware
{
public function __invoke(callable $handler) {
return function (RequestInterface $request, array $options) use ($handler) {
// ... do something with request
return $handler($request, $options);
}
}
}
$handlerStack = HandlerStack::create();
$handlerStack->push(new MyCustomMiddleware);
$config['handler'] = $handlerStack;
$apiClient = new GuzzleClient(new Client($config), new Description(...));
The boilerplate solution for GuzzleClient is the same as for GuzzleHttp\Client because regardless of using Guzzle Services or not, your request-modifying middleware needs to go on GuzzleHttp\Client.
You can also use
$handler->push(Middleware::mapRequest(function(){...});
Of sorts to manipulate the request. I'm not 100% certain this is the thing you're looking for. But I assume you can add your extra parameter to the Request in there.
private function createAuthStack()
{
$stack = HandlerStack::create();
$stack->push(Middleware::mapRequest(function (RequestInterface $request) {
return $request->withHeader('Authorization', "Bearer " . $this->accessToken);
}));
return $stack;
}
More Examples here: https://hotexamples.com/examples/guzzlehttp/Middleware/mapRequest/php-middleware-maprequest-method-examples.html