Comments on: Unit testing framework

By: Jean Bilheux

Jean Bilheux — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 17:34:08 +0000

Michael,

I discovered this unit test framework this week and used it with success. Excellent program. Thanks a lot

Jean

By: Michael Galloy

Michael Galloy — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 21:56:54 +0000

Compilation should be automatic if the files are named according to the normal class definition scheme in IDL i.e. the "myprojecttest" would be in the file "myprojecttest__define.pro".

Also, using test suites, it is possible for mgunit to automatically find/compile/run all the tests in a given directory hierarchy and run them.

By: David

David — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 18:22:18 +0000

Hello,

Is there a way to achieve automatic compilation of tests? That is to say, if I issue the command mgunit, 'myprojecttest', can it be made automatically to find the file myprojecttest.pro and compile its contents?

Thanks! Cheers, David

By: michaelgalloy.com » Update to MGunit

michaelgalloy.com » Update to MGunit — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 23:21:05 +0000

[...] Fixtures: update to unit testing framework and Unit testing framework for more information about the testing framework. [...]

By: michaelgalloy.com » Fixtures: update to unit testing framework

michaelgalloy.com » Fixtures: update to unit testing framework — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 20:59:49 +0000

[...] See “Unit testing framework” for an overview of the unit test framework. [...]

By: Michael Galloy

Michael Galloy — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 21:28:41 +0000

You can have persistent data used in different methods of a test (at least a simple version of it). Setup the data in the init method, store it as instance variables, and clean it up in the cleanup method.

I have thought about adding "fixtures" which would just mean that a particular method (like "setup") would be called before each test and another (like "teardown") would be called after each test. Data would still be stored as instance variables of the test case. Then each test would be sure to have its pristine data not messed up by some other test.

By: mpiper

mpiper — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 21:15:23 +0000

I’d like to include persistent data that I can use in different methods of a test class. Is there a way to do this with MGunit?

By: Michael Galloy

Michael Galloy — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 17:52:25 +0000

Glad you find it useful!

Send me an example of the bug in mgtestclirunner. I run test cases and have not had the problem you are discussing.

I do like the idea of passing keywords to tests. I have some test currently that can produce graphical output or not and having a keyword to use instead of changing the source code of the test would be nice.

By: Robert Barnett

Robert Barnett — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 02:23:12 +0000

I was also thinking of passing keywords from the mgtestsuite::add method to the mgtestcase::init method of the test case.

self->add, ['indgentest', 'findgentest'], SETTING_A=3

...

function indgentest::init, SETTING_A=3

Perhaps this is not desirable because it would void the test logic being encapsulated in the test case class?

By: Robert Barnett

Robert Barnett — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 02:12:10 +0000

Great stuff Mike. I've finally started using unit test in production code.

It would be good to include the example from the post in the source code bundle. I keep needing to refer to this post everytime I get confused between a test case and test suite.

I found that I can run a test case by itself, but there is a bug in mgtestclirunnner. Not all methods accept the level keyword as 0.