Need to write junit to check the following method which returns a list of files.
public List<pdffiles> noticesPerform (Account account, fromDate, ToDate)
{
List<pdffiles> notices = new Arraylist();
............
..
return notices;
}
how to check in junit
how to check the return list is not null? whether need to use asserThat or something? Is there any best way to do it?
how to pass the test object account,fromDate,Todate to test the method?
Use AssertNull() method to check for nulls.
Create the objects, or mock them (If you decide to take the mocking approach, you can create methods that initialize these parameter objects, then you can mock these objects by providing an alternative method for their creation.)
use fest assert 2.0
then you can do sth like:
XXX returnedList = noticesPerform (...)
assertThat(returnedList).containsOnly(A, B, C);
Related
This is my controller.php:
$courserecord = $this->front->get_data_wheree('tbl_course_offered.course_id',array('isactive'=>'1'));
This is my Model.php:
function get_data_wheree($table,$where)
{
return $this->db->group_by($table,$where)->result();
}
In my model.php I want to use DISTINCT OR GROUP_BY in the Query.
The group_by is not working properly.
Your model is not working because the result() method is a member of the class CI_DB_result but group_by() returns an instance of CI_DB_query_builder. In other words, you are trying to call a method that does not exist for the class being used.
The methods get() and get_where() are the only two Query Builder methods that return a CI_DB_result object. Put simply, you have to call get() or get_where() before you can use result() or any similar methods.
The other problem is that group_by() does not take a second argument of the type you provide. You're providing an array but it expects a boolean. You need to add another method to define a where condition.
Your model's method should look like the following.
I changed the name of the first argument to better describe its purpose.
function get_data_where($groupby, $where)
{
return $this->db
->group_by($groupby)
->where($where)
->get('tbl_course_offered')
->result();
}
I want to create specific Object according to the type argument.
Pseudo code looks like this.
sub new {
my $type = shift;
if($type eq "S1") {$interface = X->new(); }
if($type eq "S2") {$interface = Y->new(); }
etc...
return $interface;
}
Options might be:
Substitute "package" name with $type argument. Requires package name coordination with $type.
Use Hash{S1 => X} in the Master constructor to select Value according to $type passed. Requires Hash maintenance when adding new
Object types.
I don't like any of above. Looking trully polimorphic way to accomplish that.
Thank You,
k
Your best option would likely be to use a factory pattern. A factory method takes the parameters for creating an instance of your class, then decides which object to instantiate and return from that. This can also make dependency injection easier for testing.
You'd probably be looking at something like this (in Java-esque code), with an employee object:
public class EmployeeFactory
{
public static create(String type)
{
switch (type) {
case type1:
return new EmployeeTypeOne();
case type2:
return new EmployeeTypeTwo();
default:
throw new Exception("Unrecognized type");
}
}
}
Your employees would inherit from a common interface or abstract class. You can use the factory to handle constructor parameters as well if you prefer, just try to keep things fairly reasonable (don't pass a million parameters - the factory should internally handle complex objects)
See http://refactoring.com/catalog/replaceConstructorWithFactoryMethod.html for more information.
You might like Module::PluginFinder for that. Create all your specific types in a specific namespace and give them each some identifying (constant? sub?) that the main dispatcher will then use to identify which class handles a given type.
I have a PagedModel class which implements IEnumerable to just return the ModelData, ignoring the paging data. I have also overridden Equals and GetHashCode to allow comparing two PagedModel objects by their ModelData, PageNumber, and TotalPages, and PageSize.
Here's the problem
Dim p1 As New PagedModel() With {
.PageNumber = 1,
.PageSize = 10,
.TotalPages = 10,
.ModelData = GetModelData()
}
Dim p2 As New PagedModel() With {
.PageNumber = 1,
.PageSize = 10,
.TotalPages = 10,
.ModelData = GetModelData()
}
p1.Equals(p2) =====> True
Assert.AreEqual(p1, p2) ======> False!
It looks like NUnit is calling it's internal EnumerableEqual method to compare my PagedModel's instead of using the Equals methods I provided! Is there any way to override this behavior, or do I have to write a custom Assertion.
Doing what you are asking: I would advise against it but if you really don't like NUnit's behaviour and want to customize the assertion you can provide your own EqualityComparer.
Assert.That(p1, Is.EqualTo(p2).Using(myCustomEqualityComparer));
What you should be doing (short answer): You need GetHashCode and equals on ModelData instead of PagedModel since you are using PagedModel as the collection and ModelData as the elements.
What you should be doing (Long answer):
Instead of overriding Equals(object) on PagedModel you need to implement IEquatable<T> on ModelData, where T is the type parameter to the IEnumerable, as well as override GetHashCode(). These two methods are what all IEnumerable methods in .Net use to determine equality (for operations such as Union, Distinct etc) when using the Default Equality Comparer (you don't specify your own IEqualityComparer).
The [Default Equality Comparer] checks whether type T implements the System.IEquatable interface and, if so, returns an EqualityComparer that uses that implementation. Otherwise, it returns an EqualityComparer that uses the overrides of Object.Equals and Object.GetHashCode provided by T.
To function correctly, GetHashCode needs to return the same results for all objects that return true for .Equals(T). The reverse is not necessarily true - GetHashCode can return collisions for objects that are not equal. More information here - see Marc Gravel's accepted answer. I have also found the implementation of GetHashCode in that answer using primes very useful.
If you take a look at the implementation of the NUnit equality comparer in the GIT repo, you will see that there is a dedicated comparison block for two enumerations, which has a higher priority (simply because it is placed higher) than the comparisons using the IEquatable<T> interface or the Object.Equals(Object) method, which you have implemented or overloaded in your PagedModel class.
I don't know if this is a bug or a feature, but you probably should ask yourself first, if implementing the IEnumerable<ModelData> interface directly by your PagedModel class is actually the best option, especially because your PagedModel is something more than just an enumeration of ModelData instances.
Probably it would be enough (or even better) to provide the ModelData enumeration via a simple read-only IEnumerable<ModelData> property of the PagedModelclass. NUnit would stop looking at your PagedModel object as at a simple enumeration of ModelData objects and your unit tests would behave as expected.
The only other option is the one suggested by csauve; to implement a simple custom IComparer for your PagedModel and to supply an instance of it to all asserts where you will compare two PagedModel instances:
internal class PagedModelComparer : System.Collections.IComparer
{
public static readonly IComparer Instance = new PagedModelComparer();
private PagedModelComparer()
{
}
public int Compare( object x, object y )
{
return x is PagedModel && ((PagedModel)x).Equals( y );
}
}
...
[Test]
...
Assert.That( actual, Is.EqualTo( expected ).Using( PagedModelComparer.Instance ) );
...
But this will make your tests more complicated than necessary and you will always have to think to use your special comparer whenever you are writing additional tests for the PagedModel.
I could use some really good links that explain Generics and how to use them. But I also have a very specific question, relater to working on a current project.
Given this class constructor:
public class SecuredDomainViewModel<TDomainContext, TEntity> : DomainViewModel<TDomainContext, TEntity>
where TDomainContext : DomainContext, new()
where TEntity : Entity, new()
public SecuredDomainViewModel(TDomainContext domainContext, ProtectedItem protectedItem)
: base(domainContext)
{
this.protectedItem = protectedItem;
}
And its creation this way:
DomainViewModel d;
d = new SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, MyEntityType>(this.context, selectedProtectedItem);
Assuming I have 20 different EntityTypes within MyContext, is there any easier way to call the constructor without a large switch statement?
Also, since d is DomainViewModel and I later need to access methods from SecuredDomainViewModel, it seems I need to do this:
if (((SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, MyEntityType>)d).CanEditEntity)
But again "MyEntityType" could actually be one of 20 diffent types. Is there anyway to write these types of statements where MyEntityType is returned from some sort of Reflection?
Additional Info for Clarification:
I will investigate ConstructorInfo, but I think I may have incorrectly described what I'm looking to do.
Assume I have the DomainViewModel, d in my original posting.
This may have been constructed via three possible ways:
d = new SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, Order>(this.context, selectedProtectedItem);
d = new SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, Invoice>(this.context, selectedProtectedItem);
d = new SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, Consumer>(this.context, selectedProtectedItem);
Later, I need to access methods on the SecuredDomainViewModel, which currently must be called this way:
ex: if (((SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, Order)d).CanEditEntity)
ex: if (((SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, Invoice)d).CanEditEntity)
ex: if (((SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, Consumer)d).CanEditEntity)
Assuming I have N+ entity types in this context, what I was hoping to be able to do is
something like this with one call:
ex: if (((SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, CurrentEntityType)d).CanEditEntity)
Where CurrentEntityType was some sort of function or other type of call that returned Order, Invoice or Consumer based on the current item entity type.
Is that possible?
You can create a non-generic interface that has the CanEditEntity property on it, make SecuredDomainViewModel inherit off that, then call the property through the interface...
Also, the new() constructor allows you to call a constructor on a generic type that has no arguments (so you can just write new TEntity()), but if you want to call a constructor that has parameters one handy trick I use is to pass it in as a delegate:
public void Method<T>(Func<string, bool, T> ctor) {
// ...
T newobj = ctor("foo", true);
// ...
}
//called later...
Method((s, b) => new MyClass(s, b));
I can't help on the links, and likely not on the type either.
Constructor
If you have the Type, you can get the constructor:
ConstructorInfo construtor = typeof(MyEntityType).GetConstructor(new object[]{TDomainContext, ProtectedItem});
Type
I'm not really sure what you're looking for, but I can only see something like
if (((SecuredDomainViewModel<MyContext, entityType>)d).CanEditEntity)
{
entityType=typeof(Orders)
}
being what you want.
I am re-writing this question to make it clearer what I need to do. I am trying to use Rhino-Mock to test:
public IQueryable<TxRxMode> GetAllModes()
{
return m_context.TxRxModes.Where(txRxMode => txRxMode.Active);
}
Here's the code:
var context = MockRepository.GenerateStub<IProjectContext>();
//Returns an empty list
context.Expect(c => c.TxRxModes.Where(Arg<Func<TxRxMode, bool>>.Is.Anything)).Return(new List<TxRxMode>().AsQueryable());
TxRxModes in an IObjectSet property on the context and I want it to return an empty IQueryable<TxRxMode> object when the return m_context.TxRxModes.Where(txRxMode => txRxMode.Active); code is called.
When I run this, the Expect method call throws the an ArgumentNullException:
Value cannot be null.
Parameter name: predicate
I have tried the simpler:
IObjectSet<TxRxMode> modes = MockRepository.GenerateStub<IObjectSet<TxRxMode>>();
context.Expect(c => c.TxRxModes).Return(modes);
but this throws a null reference exception when I call
return m_context.TxRxModes.Where(txRxMode => txRxMode.Active);
Basically, this is part of the method I am trying to mock, so the key question is how do I mock this Where statement?
Where is actually a global static method and you shouldn't be mocking it. It operates on an IEnumerable however and you could just mock that.
Its kind of a hassle doing it with rhino mocks however. I would recommend doing the mock manually (if you need to do it at all).