[Route("api/[controller]")]
public class DigitalDocumentController : Controller
{
private IDigitalDocumentService digitalDocumentService;
private IDatabaseInitializer databaseInitializer;
public DigitalDocumentController(IDigitalDocumentService digitalDocumentService)
{
this.digitalDocumentService = digitalDocumentService;
}
public DigitalDocumentController(IDatabaseInitializer databaseInitializer)
{
this.databaseInitializer = databaseInitializer;
}
i want two controller constructor in my project to Mock in xUnit Testing, but there was an error in my swagger interface {
"error": "Multiple constructors accepting all given argument types have been found in type 'i2ana.Web.Controllers.DigitalDocumentController'. There should only be one applicable constructor."
}
can anybody help me how i can do it ?
…
what i am try to do , is to test Uniquness of the Name Field in my database
My testing code:
[Fact]
public void AddNotUniqueName_ReturnsNotFoundObjectResult()
{
var digitalDocument = new DigitalDocument
{
Image = new byte[] { 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20 },
CreatedOn = DateTime.Today,
Id = 6,
Location = "temp",
Name = "Flower",
Tages = new List<Tag> { new Tag { Id = 1, Value = "Tag 1" }, new Tag { Id = 1, Value = "Tag 2" } }
};
// Arrange
var mockRepo = new Mock<IDatabaseInitializer>();
mockRepo.Setup(repo => repo.SeedAsync()).Returns(Task.FromResult(AddUniqueDigitalDocument(digitalDocument)));
var controller = new DigitalDocumentController(mockRepo.Object);
// Act
var result = controller.Add(digitalDocument);
// Assert
var viewResult = Assert.IsType<NotFoundObjectResult>(result);
var model = Assert.IsAssignableFrom<int>(viewResult.Value);
Assert.NotEqual(6, model);
}
the "AddUniqueDigitalDocument" returns 6 only to test that the new digitaldocumet is not the same id of my initialize data.
When using dependency injection, you should only have one constructor where all dependencies can be satisfied. Otherwise, how is the DI container to know which constructor to utilize? That's your issue here. Using the Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection package, and since this is a controller you're injecting into, there's only one reasonable way to solve this: don't register one or the other of the services, IDigitalDocumentService or IDatatabaseInitializer. If only one is registered, the service collection will simply use the constructor it has a registered service for.
It's possible with a more featured DI container, you might be able to configure something to allow it choose the proper constructor. How to do that would be entirely dependent on the DI container you end up going with, though, so not much more can be said on the subject at this point. Just realize that the default container (Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection) is intentionally simplistic, so if you needs are more complex, you should sub in a full DI container.
UPDATE
You should be doing integration testing with the test host and an in-memory database. The basic approach is:
public MyTests()
{
_server = new TestServer(new WebHostBuilder().UseStartup<TestStartup>());
_context = _server.Host.Services.GetRequiredService<MyContext>();
_client = _server.CreateClient();
}
In your app's Startup, create a virtual method:
public virtual void ConfigureDatabase(IServiceCollection services)
{
// normal database setup here, e.g.
services.AddDbContext<MyContext>(o =>
o.UseSqlServer(Configuration.GetConnectionString("Foo")));
}
Then, in ConfigureServices, replace your database setup with a call to this method.
Finally, in your test project, create a TestStartup class and override the ConfigureDatabase method:
public class TestStartup : Startup
{
public override void ConfigureDatabase(IServiceCollection services)
{
var databaseName = Guid.NewGuid().ToString();
services.AddDbContext<MyContext>(o =>
o.UseInMemoryDatabase(databaseName));
}
}
Now, in your tests you just make requests against the test client (which is just an HttpClient instance, so it works like any other HttpClient). You start by setting up your database with appropriate test data, and then ensure that the correct response is returned:
// Arrange
_context.Add(new DigitalDocument { Name = "Foo" });
await _context.SaveChanges();
// Act
// Submit a `DigitalDocument` with the same name via `_client`
// Assert
// Inspect the response body for some indication that it was considered invalid. Or you could simply assert that no new `DigitalDocument` was created by querying `_context` (or both)
This is admittedly a lot easier with an API, as with a web application, you're going to invariably need to do some HTML parsing. However, the docs and corresponding sample app help you with that.
Additionally, in actual practice, you'd want to use a test fixture to prevent having to bootstrap a test server for every test. Again, the docs have you covered there. One thing to note, though, is that once you switch to using a fixture, your database will then be persisted between tests. To segregate your test data, make sure that you call EnsureDeleted() on your context before each test. This can be easily done in the test class' constructor:
public class MyTests : IClassFixture<WebApplicationFactory<Startup>>
{
private readonly HttpClient _client;
private readonly MyContext _context;
public MyTests(WebApplicationFactory<Startup> factory)
{
factory = factory.WithWebHostBuilder(builder => builder.UseStartup<TestStartup>());
_client = factory.CreateClient();
_context = factory.Server.Host.Services.GetRequiredService<MyContext>();
_context.EnsureDeleted();
}
I don't even like this much bootstrapping code in my tests, though, so I usually inherit from a fixture class instead:
public class TestServerFixture : IClassFixture<WebApplicationFactory<Startup>>
{
protected readonly HttpClient _client;
protected readonly MyContext _context;
public TestServerFixture(WebApplicationFactory<Startup> factory)
{
factory = factory.WithWebHostBuilder(builder => builder.UseStartup<TestStartup>());
_client = factory.CreateClient();
_context = factory.Server.Host.Services.GetRequiredService<MyContext>();
_context.EnsureDeleted();
}
}
Then, for each test class:
public class MyTests : TestServerFixture
{
public MyTests(WebApplicationFactory<Startup> factory)
: base(factory)
{
}
This may seem like a lot, but most of it is one-time setup. Then, your tests will be much more accurate, more robust, and even easier in many ways.
Related
I have these two methods in my service class
public class PatientService : IPatientService
{
private readonly IRestClient _restClient;
private readonly IAppSettings _appSettings;
public PatientService(IRestClient restClient, IAppSettings appSettings)
{
_restClient = restClient;
_appSettings = appSettings;
}
public async Task<IList<PatientViewModel>> GetPatients(int wardId)
{
var url = _appSettings.Server + _appSettings.PatientServiceEndPoint + wardId;
var token = _appSettings.Token;
return GetPatientList(await _restClient.GetAsync<List<PatientInfo>>(url, token));
}
public IList<PatientViewModel> GetPatientList(IList<PatientInfo> patientInfoList)
{
return patientInfoList.Select(p => new PatientViewModel(p)).ToList();
}
}
I need to add this code to my Xunit.cs. How to do it?
I've implemented this and I do not know how to proceed.
private readonly PatientListPageViewModel _patientListPageViewModel;
private readonly Mock<IPatientService> _patient;
public PatientServiceTests()
{
_patient = new Mock<IPatientService>();
_patientListPageViewModel = new PatientListPageViewModel(_patient.Object);
}
[Fact]
public void GetListByWard_PassingWardId_GetPatientsCountAccordingToWardId()
{
}
This is what I tried to do. How to convert those two methods in service to be testable?
You did get mocking a bit wrong. It is not the component under test that is mocked, but its dependencies. When unit-testing you'd like to test a unit in isolation. Your case of mocking would be kind of correct if you unit-tested the PatientListPageViewModel, but since your test class is named PatientServiceTests I assume that you really wanted to test PatientService. If you wanted to test the former, you would be quite right to mock IPatientService, but when testing PatientService, IRestClient and IAppSettings shall be mocked
public PatientServiceTests()
{
_restClientMock = new Mock<IRestClient>();
_appSettingsMock = new Mock<IAppSettings>();
_patientService = new PatientService(_restClientMock.Object, _appSettingsMock.Object);
}
And your test could be something like
[Fact]
public async Task ReturnsCorrectPatientList() // async supported as of xUnit 1.9
{
// set up the mock
_restClientMock.SetUp(restClient => restClient.GetAsync<List<Patient>>(It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>())
.Returns(() => Task.FromResult(/* what patients it shall return */));
var result = await _patientService.GetPatients(0);
// compare whether the returned result matches your expectations
}
If you wanted to test whether the URL is formed correctly, you could use Verify
[Theory]
[InlineData("SERVER", "ENDPOINT", 12, "1234", "SERVERENDPOINT12")]
[InlineData("https://localhost:65000", "/patients/", 5, https://localhost:65000/patients/5")]
public void TestWhetherCorrectUrlIsCalled(string server, string endpoint, int wardId, string token, string expectedUrl)
{
_appSettingsMock.SetupGet(appSettings => appSettings.Server).Returns(server);
_appSettingsMock.SetupGet(appSettings => appSettings.PatientServiceEndPoint).Returns(endpoint);
_appSettingsMock.SetupGet(appSettings => appSettings.Token).Returns(token);
_restClientMock.SetUp(restClient => restClient.GetAsync<List<Patient>>(It.IsAny<string>(), It.IsAny<string>())
.Returns(() => Task.FromResult(new List<Patient>()));
// we do not need the result
await _patientService.GetPatients(wardId);
_restClientMock.Verify(restClient => restClient.GetAsync<List<Patient>>(exptectedUrl, token), Times.Once);
}
We are setting up the IRestClient in this case, since it would return null otherwise. And await null would cause your test to fail. After GetPatients has been called we are using Verify to verify that GetAsync has been called with the correct parameters. If it has not been called, Verify will throw and your test will fail. Times.Once means, that GetAsync shall have been called once and only once.
On a side note: Viewmodels shall have a meaning in the context of your user interface only. Services shall be independent and hence not return viewmodels, as you did, but POCOs (or maybe domain models). In this case the interface of your service should be
public interface IPatientService
{
public async Task<IList<Patient>> GetPatients(int wardId);
// ...
}
I have two ViewModels, MainWindowShellViewModel(shellVm) and MainWindowContentViewModel(contentVm). The shellVm publishes an event and the contentVm subscribes to it.
The shell VM looks something like the following. I have omitted many details.
// ctor
public MainWindowShellViewModel(IEventAggregator eventAggregator)
{
_EventAggregator = eventAggregator ?? throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(IEventAggregator) + " service injected is null!!!");
_AppStartingClosingEventToken = _EventAggregator.GetEvent<AppStartingClosingEvent>();
}
private void MainWindowShellLoaded()
{
var payload = new AppStartingClosingEventData();
payload.Data = "MainWindowStarting";
_AppStartingClosingEventToken.Publish(payload);
}
The AppStartingClosingEvent is a no brainer type as follows.
public class AppStartingClosingEvent : PubSubEvent<AppStartingClosingEventData>
{ }
public class AppStartingClosingEventData
{
public string Data { get; set; }
}
And finally, the contentVm looks as follows.
public MainWindowContentViewModel(IEventAggregator eventAggregator)
{
_AppClosingEventToken.Subscribe(AppStartingClosing);
}
private void AppStartingClosing(AppStartingClosingEventData appStartingClosingEventData)
{
if (appStartingClosingEventData.Data == "MainWindowStarting")
LoadState(appStartingClosingEventData);
if (appStartingClosingEventData.Data == "MainWindowClosing")
SaveState(appStartingClosingEventData);
}
I want to test the that the method AppStartingClosing inside of contentVm is called with proper data. I am using Moq
I am running out of ideas. Please suggest. Tried the following but so far no success.
How do I test Prism event aggregator subscriptions, on the UIThread?
Using Moq to verify a Prism event subscription fails
Unit testing with Moq, Prism 6, and Event Aggregation
Moq Event Aggregator Is it possible
// Verifying a delegate was called with Moq
EDIT
Here is what I have tried.
// Arrange
var mockingKernel = new MoqMockingKernel();
var eventAggregatorMock = mockingKernel.GetMock<IEventAggregator>();
var eventBeingListenedTo = new AppStartingClosingEvent();
eventAggregatorMock.Setup(e => e.GetEvent<AppStartingClosingEvent>()).Returns(eventBeingListenedTo);
var vm = mockingKernel.Get<MainWindowContentViewModel>();
var evData = new AppStartingClosingEventData();
evData.Data = "MainWindowStarting";
// Act
eventBeingListenedTo.Publish(evData);
Now, what should I do? I am not even clear if I have approached correctly.
Now what should I do?
After eventBeingListenedTo.Publish(evData); look whether whatever effect SaveState should have is actually happening.
I am not even clear if I have approached correctly.
You do not want to test whether one method in a class is called by another method of that class.
So instead of trying to do
subjectUnderTest.DoStuff();
MagicallyVerifyThatThisGotCalled( () => subjectUnderTest.SomeEffect() );
you should do
var subjectUnderTest = new SubjectUnderTest( serviceMock.Object );
subjectUnderTest.DoStuff();
serviceMock.Verify( x => x.SomeEffectOnTheService(), Times.Once );
Assert.That( subjectUnderTest.SomePropertyThatsChanged, Is.EqualTo( newValue ) );
Whatever SubjectUnderTest does internally to achieve the desired effect, is not in the scope of the test. It's private to SubjectUnderTest, you don't care how it is done as long as it is done at all. When testing, look at the externally visible state of your subject under test, and what it does to its dependencies.
I was trying to verify whether my log warning message is written via NUnit mocking. I am getting this error message :
An exception of type 'System.NotSupportedException' occurred in Moq.dll but was not handled in user code
Additional information: Invalid verify on a non-virtual (overridable in VB) member: m => m.LogWarning(String.Format("comments not found for part number :{0}", (Object)0), new[] { "111" })
code:
mockLogger.Verify(m => m.LogWarning($"comments not found for part number :{0}", "111"), Times.Exactly(1));
This is happening because NUnit mocking framework does not support extension methods. A few people on stack overflow have suggested to use Log method instead of level wise methods.
What am I missing?
Firstly, you don't need the $ at the start of the string. That's for string interpolation. The LogWarning message is doing a string.format, hence the {0}
Mock frameworks cannot directly mock static methods. The problem in your case is the LogWarning method - that is the static (extension) method.
The simplest way of overcoming this issue is by using a wrapper class. Here's how I got it, in your case.
Firstly I created an interface
public interface IMyLogWarning
{
void LogWarning(string msg, params object[] args);
}
Then I created a class which implements that interface
public class MyLogWarning<T> : IMyLogWarning where T : class
{
private readonly ILogger _logger;
public MyLogWarning(ILogger<T> logger)
{
// Using constructor for DI
_logger = logger;
}
public void LogWarning(string msg, params object[] args)
{
_logger.LogWarning(msg, args);
}
}
The reason for these two is that I'll use these in my code as well as the unit test.
The constructor in the class is setup so it can be populated using dependency injection, something like this in your ConfigureServices method. Feel free to change this; was a quick stab at it on my part.
services.AddTransient<IMyLogWarning, MyLogWarning<MyViewModel>>();
You can then create a unit test that's roughly like this
[Test]
public void LoggingTest_LogAMessage_ConfirmedLogWasRun()
{
// TODO - add the rest of your test code
// Arrange
var warningMsg = "comments not found for part number :{0}";
var partNumber = "111";
var mockLogger = new Mock<IMyLogWarning>();
// Act
mockLogger.Object.LogWarning(warningMsg, partNumber);
// Assert
mockLogger.Verify(m => m.LogWarning(warningMsg, partNumber), Times.Exactly(1));
}
I am creating a small proof of concept asp.net web api 2 service with entity framework code first. The controller's constructor looks like
public AccountController: ApiController
{
private readonly DbContext context;
public AccountController(DbContext _context){
context = _context;
}
public AccountController(){context = new ApplicationContext();}
}
I need to unit test my controllers. How can I mock the DbContext class. Is there a simple way of doing this? I want to avoid all that repository pattern with lot of interfaces. Because it will be a way overkill for this prototype.
Its usually something like this if you use Nunit and Moq.
[TestFixture]
public class AccountControllerTest
{
private Mock<DbContext> mockContext;
private AccountController sut;
[SetUp]
public void TestSetup()
{
mockContext = new Mock<DbContext>();
var account = new Account() { Id = 123, Name = "Test Account" };
mockContext.SetUp(x => x.GetAccountOnContext()).Returns(account);
sut = new Controller(mockContext.Object) { Request = new HttpRequestMessage() };
sut.Request.Properties.Add(HttpPropertyKeys.HttpConfigurationKey, new HttpConfiguration());
}
[Test]
public void ControllerMethod_GetLogin_Test()
{
// assuming GetLogin calls GetAccount on DbContext()
var response = sut.GetLogin(someAccount);
Assert.AreEqual(HttpStatusCode.OK, response.StatusCode);
mockContext.Verify();
}
}
You basically want to mock out your external dependencies and test just what the SUT (System Under Test) is supposed to do. I would also strongly encourage to look at Fakes instead of mocks. In general fakes result in less brittle tests.
So in this case, you could have a FakeDbContext() that you can pass to the tests. The FakeDbContext() will behave more like the actual DbContext() but will do all those operations in-memory, so that your tests don't have a dependency with a real database.
Depending on the database you use, you can also look at starting an embedded version of the real database as a part of your tests. Just have to make sure to do the necessary stopping and clean up of the test database records after the test run is complete in the TearDown() method.
I have several Windsor Installers at my ASP.NET MVC application. They register controllers and services. Most of them depend on ICurrentService.
Controller example:
public DataStructureController(
IMapper mapper,
DataEntityService dataEntityService,
FieldDefinitionService fieldDefinitionService,
CompanyService companyService,
ICurrentService currentService,
SelectListService selectListService,
EnumResourceService enumResourceService,
WebPreprocessService preprocessService)
: base(preprocessService)
{
// Initialise variables code here
}
Service example:
public DataEntityService(DataEntitySpec specification, ICurrentService currentService)
: base(specification)
{
// Initialise variables code here
}
In my test classes I have a method, that I call once in [TestInitialize] marked method, or on/many times in [TestMethod] marked methods:
private static ICurrentService MockCurrentUser(User user)
{
var currentUserSerivceMock = new Mock<ICurrentService>(MockBehavior.Strict);
currentUserSerivceMock.Setup(x => x.UserId).Returns(user.Id);
currentUserSerivceMock.Setup(x => x.CompanyId).Returns(user.CompanyProfile.Id);
return currentUserSerivceMock.Object;
}
I want to replace ICurrentService implementation when calling the container.Resolve<> method, because it depends on HttpContext, that isn't available when unit tests run. Is it possible and how do I do it with minimum code?
You can simply create a fake HttpContext:
HttpContext.Current = new HttpContext(
new HttpRequest(null, "http://tempuri.org", null),
new HttpResponse(null));
And then in your tests:
[SetUp]
public void SetUp()
{
HttpContext.Current = new HttpContext(
new HttpRequest(null, "http://tempuri.org", null),
new HttpResponse(null));
}
[TearDown]
public void TearDown()
{
HttpContext.Current = null;
}
*Reference: http://caioproiete.net/en/fake-mock-httpcontext-without-any-special-mocking-framework/
Register your implementation as a Fallback with Windsor. Then in your test register your mock instance. That or just build up a dedicated instance of the container for your test and register what you like.