I've two files test_utils.r and test_core.r, they contain tests for various utilities and some core functions separated into different 'context'. I can control the flow of tests within each file by moving around my test_that() statements.
But am looking for a way in which I can create different workflows, say ensuring that at run time, tests from Context A_utils runs first followed by tests from Context B_Core followed by context B_Utils.
Any ideas on how this can be achieved?
BrajeshS,
I have an idea. Have you tried the skip() function in version 0.9 or better? See testthat documentation on page 7:
Description
This function allows you to skip a test if it’s not currently available.
This will produce an informative message, but will not cause the test suite
to fail.
It was introduced to skip tests if an internet connection or API not available. You could then dependent on your workflow, jump over tests.
To see example code using skip_on_cran, look at wibeasley's answer where he provides test code in Rappster's reply - https://stackoverflow.com/a/26068397/4606130
I am still getting to grips with testthat. Hope this helps you.
Related
I want to have an option on the cucumber report to mute/hide scenarios with a given tag from the results and numbers.
We have a bamboo build that runs our karate repository of features and scenarios. At the end it produces nice cucumber html reports. On the "overview-features.html" I would like to have an option added to the top right, which includes "Features", "Tags", "Steps" and "Failures", that says "Excluded Fails" or something like that. That when clicked provides the same exact information that the overview-features.html does, except that any scenario that's tagged with a special tag, for example #bug=abc-12345, is removed from the report and excluded from the numbers.
Why I need this. We have some existing scenarios that fail. They fail due to defects in our own software, that might not get fixed for 6 months to a year. We've tagged them with a specified tag, "#bug=abc-12345". I want them muted/excluded from the cucumber report that's produced at the end of the bamboo build for karate so I can quickly look at the number of passed features/scenarios and see if it's 100% or not. If it is, great that build is good. If not, I need to look into it further as we appear to have some regression. Without these scenarios that are expected to fail, and continue to fail until they're resolved, it is very tedious and time consuming to go through all the individual feature file reports and look at the failing scenarios and then look into why. I don't want them removed completely as when they start to pass I need to know so I can go back and remove the tag from the scenario.
Any ideas on how to accomplish this?
Karate 1.0 has overhauled the reporting system with the following key changes.
after the Runner completes you can massage the results and even re-try some tests
you can inject a custom HTML report renderer
This will require you to get into the details (some of this is not documented yet) and write some Java code. If that is not an option, you have to consider that what you are asking for is not supported by Karate.
If you are willing to go down that path, here are the links you need to get started.
a) Example of how to "post process" result-data before rendering a report: RetryTest.java and also see https://stackoverflow.com/a/67971681/143475
b) The code responsible for "pluggable" reports, where you can implement a new SuiteReports in theory. And in the Runner, there is a suiteReports() method you can call to provide your implementation.
Also note that there is an experimental "doc" keyword, by which you can inject custom HTML into a test-report: https://twitter.com/getkarate/status/1338892932691070976
Also see: https://twitter.com/KarateDSL/status/1427638609578967047
I want to have an option on the cucumber report to mute/hide scenarios with a given tag from the results and numbers.
We have a bamboo build that runs our karate repository of features and scenarios. At the end it produces nice cucumber html reports. On the "overview-features.html" I would like to have an option added to the top right, which includes "Features", "Tags", "Steps" and "Failures", that says "Excluded Fails" or something like that. That when clicked provides the same exact information that the overview-features.html does, except that any scenario that's tagged with a special tag, for example #bug=abc-12345, is removed from the report and excluded from the numbers.
Why I need this. We have some existing scenarios that fail. They fail due to defects in our own software, that might not get fixed for 6 months to a year. We've tagged them with a specified tag, "#bug=abc-12345". I want them muted/excluded from the cucumber report that's produced at the end of the bamboo build for karate so I can quickly look at the number of passed features/scenarios and see if it's 100% or not. If it is, great that build is good. If not, I need to look into it further as we appear to have some regression. Without these scenarios that are expected to fail, and continue to fail until they're resolved, it is very tedious and time consuming to go through all the individual feature file reports and look at the failing scenarios and then look into why. I don't want them removed completely as when they start to pass I need to know so I can go back and remove the tag from the scenario.
Any ideas on how to accomplish this?
Karate 1.0 has overhauled the reporting system with the following key changes.
after the Runner completes you can massage the results and even re-try some tests
you can inject a custom HTML report renderer
This will require you to get into the details (some of this is not documented yet) and write some Java code. If that is not an option, you have to consider that what you are asking for is not supported by Karate.
If you are willing to go down that path, here are the links you need to get started.
a) Example of how to "post process" result-data before rendering a report: RetryTest.java and also see https://stackoverflow.com/a/67971681/143475
b) The code responsible for "pluggable" reports, where you can implement a new SuiteReports in theory. And in the Runner, there is a suiteReports() method you can call to provide your implementation.
Also note that there is an experimental "doc" keyword, by which you can inject custom HTML into a test-report: https://twitter.com/getkarate/status/1338892932691070976
Also see: https://twitter.com/KarateDSL/status/1427638609578967047
Could you please help me with two questions regarding organizing tests and using Allure's "feature" tags?
If I have a few different tests but I need all of them to be included into one feature, do I have to write #Features("My Feature") annotation above each test method? Is there a way to write the #Features("My Feature") annotation once and include all required tests in it?
If I have a few logically separated classes with my #Test methods, is there an easy way to call all required tests from one TestSuite class in order to simply manage test queue?
You can write annotation #Feature once per class. But are you really need such feature? Maybe you should think a bit more and split your tests using some other way?
Allrue is not a test framework, it just a report tool. Allure does not run tests. To answer this part of question I need to know more about test framework you use, your environment (Ant, Maven, Jenkins, Teamcity etc)
It's possible to require an execution of a specific test case before the execution of the current test case?
My test cases are organized in several folder and it's possible that a test require the execution of the another test placed in the another folder (see the image below).
Any suggestions?
There is nothing you can do if the test cases are in different files, short of reorganizing your tests.
You can control the order that suites are run, and you can control the order of tests within a file, but you can't control the order of tests between files.
Best practices suggest that tests should be independent and not depend on other tests. In practice that can be difficult, but at the very least you should strive to make test suites independent of one another.
This is not a good / recommended / possible way to go.
Robot framework doesn't support it, and for a good reason. It is not sustainable to create such dependencies in the long term (or even short term).
Tests shouldn't depend on other tests. Mainly not on other tests from a different suite. What if the other suite was not run?
You can work around the issue in two ways:
You can define a file called
__init__.robot
In a directory. That suite setup and suite teardown in the file would run before anything in the underlying folders.
You can also turn the other test into a keyword so:
Test C simply calls a keyword that makes Test C run and also updates a global variable (Test_C_already_runs)
Test B would use then issue
run if '${Test_C_already_runs}'=='true' Test_C_Keyword
You would have to set a value to Test_C_already_runs before that anyway (as part of variable import, or as part of some suite_setup) to prevent variable not found error.
PhpUnit has a generator of skel based on an existing class.
But it's works once.
If later some new method are added (because a dev doesnt work with tdd ), the test file is incomplete.
Is there a tool to generate a skel for uncovered method ?
I don't know any, and I also don't see the need. That skeleton generator generates one test method per function it finds, but you cannot test all use cases of a slightly advanced function within only one test function.
Also, the name of the test function is generated - but better names can and should be created to describe the intended test case or behavior of the tested function. Like "testGetQuoteFromStockMarket" vs. "testGettingMicrosoftQuoteFromStockMarketShouldReturnQuoteObject" and "testGettingUmbrellaCorporationFromStockMarketShouldFailWithException".
Note that you cannot test the throwing of exceptions in combination with cases that do not throw exceptions.
So all in all there simply is no use case to create "one test method per method" at all, and if you add new methods, it is your task to manually add the appropriate number of new tests for that - the generated code coverage statistics will tell you how well you did, or which functions are untested.
AFAIK there is no built-in phpunit functionality to updated the auto-generated test code; that is typical of most code generators.
The good news is that each of the functions is added quite cleanly and independently. So what I would do is rename your existing unit test file to *.old, regenerate a fresh test file, then use meld (or the visual diff tool of your choice) to merge in the new functions.
Aside: automatic test generation is really only needed at the start of a new class anyway; the idea of exactly one unit test per function is more about generating nice coverage stats to please your boss; from the point of view of building good software, some functions will need multiple tests, and some functions (getters and setters come to mind) do not really need any, and sometimes multiple functions are best covered by a single unit test (getters and setters again come to mind).