I'm trying to unit test some code that calls into VirtualPathUtility.ToAbsolute.
Is this possible with the unit testing tools provided with VS 2008? If not, is it possible with a later version of Visual Studio?
We're well past VS 2008 but for anyone who is still grappling with this issue, I've found a solution on: http://forums.asp.net/t/995143.aspx?Mocking+HTTPContext+object.
Use the following code in your test init to override the default AppDomain values. (The VirutalPathUtility static methods will use your new values.)
[TestInitialize]
public void Initialize()
{
// Fake out env for VirtualPathUtility.ToAbsolute(..)
string path = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectory;
const string virtualDir = "/";
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.SetData(".appDomain", "*");
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.SetData(".appPath", path);
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.SetData(".appVPath", virtualDir);
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.SetData(".hostingVirtualPath", virtualDir);
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.SetData(".hostingInstallDir", HttpRuntime.AspInstallDirectory);
TextWriter tw = new StringWriter();
HttpWorkerRequest wr = new SimpleWorkerRequest("default.aspx", "", tw);
HttpContext.Current = new HttpContext(wr);
}
Static classes and methods are really hard to work with in unit tests (which is one reason why i try to avoid them). In this case, I would probably develop a wrapper around the static class, containing just those methods that I use. I would then use my wrapper class in place of the real class. The wrapper class would be constructed so that it is easy to mock out.
Example (sort of) using RhinoMocks. Note that it uses dependency injection to give the class under test a copy of the wrapper. If the supplied wrapper is null, it creates one.
public class MyClass
{
private VPU_Wrapper VPU { get; set; }
public MyClass() : this(null) {}
public MyClass( VPU_Wrapper vpu )
{
this.VPU = vpu ?? new VPU_Wrapper();
}
public string SomeMethod( string path )
{
return this.VPU.ToAbsolute( path );
}
}
public class VPU_Wrapper
{
public virtual string ToAbsolute( string path )
{
return VirtualPathUtility.ToAbsolute( path );
}
}
[TestMethod]
public void SomeTest()
{
string path = "~/path";
string expected = "/app/path";
var vpu = MockRepository.GenerateMock<VPU_Wrapper>();
vpu.Expect( v => v.ToAbsolute( path) ).Return( expected );
MyClass class = new MyClass( vpu );
string actual = class.SomeMethod( path );
Assert.AreEqual( expected, actual );
vpu.VerifyAllExpectations();
}
Using Microsoft Fakes we can fake VirtualPathUtility ToAbsolute Method easily.
Browse System.Web in References > Right Click > Add Fakes Assembly.
Use Following Code
using Microsoft.QualityTools.Testing.Fakes;
using Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting;
using System.Web.Fakes;
public class TestCode
{
[TestMethod]
public void TestSummaryTabLinks()
{
using (ShimsContext.Create())
{
//Fake VirtualPathUtility ToAbsolute method to Work properly in case of Unit Test Project
//For Finding Relative url.
ShimVirtualPathUtility.ToAbsoluteString = (string s) => { return s; };
MyClass class = new MyClass( vpu );
string actual = class.SomeMethod( path );
Assert.AreEqual( expected, actual );
}
}
}
Related
I'd like to make wrapper to implement simple data binding pattern -- while some data have been modified all registered handlers are got notified. I have started with this (for js target):
class Main {
public static function main() {
var target = new Some();
var binding = new Bindable(target);
binding.one = 5;
// binding.two = 0.12; // intentionally unset field
binding.three = []; // wrong type
binding.four = 'str'; // no such field in wrapped class
trace(binding.one, binding.two, binding.three, binding.four, binding.five);
// outputs: 5, null, [], str, null
trace(target.one, target.two, target.three);
// outputs: 5, null, []
}
}
class Some {
public var one:Int;
public var two:Float;
public var three:Bool;
public function new() {}
}
abstract Bindable<TClass>(TClass) {
public inline function new(source) { this = source; }
#:op(a.b) public function setField<T>(name:String, value:T) {
Reflect.setField(this, name, value);
// TODO notify handlers
return value;
}
#:op(a.b) public function getField<T>(name:String):T {
return cast Reflect.field(this, name);
}
}
So I have some frustrating issues: interface of wrapped object doesn't expose to wrapper, so there's no auto completion or strict type checking, some necessary attributes can be easily omitted or even misspelled.
Is it possible to fix my solution or should I better move to the macros?
I almost suggested here to open an issue regarding this problem. Because some time ago, there was a #:followWithAbstracts meta available for abstracts, which could be (or maybe was?) used to forward fields and call #:op(a.b) at the same time. But that's not really necessary, Haxe is powerful enough already.
abstract Binding<TClass>(TClass) {
public function new(source:TClass) { this = source; }
#:op(a.b) public function setField<T>(name:String, value:T) {
Reflect.setField(this, name, value);
// TODO notify handlers
trace("set: $name -> $value");
return value;
}
#:op(a.b) public function getField<T>(name:String):T {
trace("get: $name");
return cast Reflect.field(this, name);
}
}
#:forward
#:multiType
abstract Bindable<TClass>(TClass) {
public function new(source:TClass);
#:to function to(t:TClass) return new Binding(t);
}
We use here multiType abstract to forward fields, but resolved type is actually regular abstract. In effect, you have completion working and #:op(a.b) called at the same time.
You need #:forward meta on your abstract. However, this will not make auto-completion working unless you remove #:op(A.B) because it shadows forwarded fields.
EDIT: it seems that shadowing happened first time I added #:forward to your abstract, afterwards auto-completion worked just fine.
This is a know error when using C# expressions in windows workflow. The article at https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/windows-workflow-foundation/csharp-expressions#CodeWorkflows explains the reason and how to fix it. It all works fine for me in standard workflows, but as soon as I add a custom NativeActivity to the WF, I get that same error again !
Below the code of how I load the XAML workflow and the simple NativeActivity (which is the ONLY activity in the test workflow and inside that activity is a simple assign expression).
Loading and invoking WF via XAML:
`XamlXmlReaderSettings settings = new XamlXmlReaderSettings()
{
LocalAssembly = GetContextAssembly()
};
XamlReader reader = reader = ActivityXamlServices.CreateReader(new XamlXmlReader(fileURL, settings));
ActivityXamlServicesSettings serviceSettings = new ActivityXamlServicesSettings
{
CompileExpressions = true
};
var activity = ActivityXamlServices.Load(reader, serviceSettings);
WorkflowInvoker.Invoke(activity);`
Doing it in code throws same Exception:
Variable<string> foo = new Variable<string>
{
Name = "Foo"
};
Activity activity = new Sequence
{
Variables = { foo },
Activities =
{
new TimeExecuteUntilAborted
{
Activities =
{
new Assign<string>
{
To = new CSharpReference<string>("Foo"),
Value = new CSharpValue<string>("new Random().Next(1, 101).ToString()")
}
}
}
}
};
CompileExpressions(activity);//the method from the article mentioned above
WorkflowInvoker.Invoke(activity);
The Native Activity:
[Designer("System.Activities.Core.Presentation.SequenceDesigner, System.Activities.Core.Presentation")]
public sealed class TimeExecuteUntilAborted : NativeActivity
{
private Sequence innerSequence = new Sequence();
[Browsable(false)]
public Collection<Activity> Activities
{
get
{
return innerSequence.Activities;
}
}
[Browsable(false)]
public Collection<Variable> Variables
{
get
{
return innerSequence.Variables;
}
}
protected override void CacheMetadata(NativeActivityMetadata metadata)
{
metadata.AddImplementationChild(innerSequence);
}
protected override void Execute(NativeActivityContext context)
{
context.ScheduleActivity(innerSequence);
}
}
Your TimeExecutedUntilAborted class seems to be the culprit. I was able to swap in one of my own template NativeActivities instead and your workflow executed fine with the expressions. I'm guessing that your class is causing an issue in the compiler method when it parses your code. I used this doc as an example for my NativeActivity: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.activities.nativeactivity(v=vs.110).aspx.
Sizzle Finger's answer is no solution but pointed me into the right direction to simply check what is different. It came out that the simple call to the base class method was missing:
protected override void CacheMetadata(NativeActivityMetadata metadata)
{
base.CacheMetadata(metadata); // !! This needs to be added
metadata.AddImplementationChild(innerSequence);
}
I am trying to find a way to override a structuremap registry statement containing EnrichWith like so (here is the Registry class):
public class MyRegistry : Registry
{
public MyRegistry()
{
For(typeof(IMyList<int>)).EnrichWith(x => DecorateMyList(x)).Use(typeof(MyListA<int>));
For(typeof(IMyList<int>)).Use(typeof(MyListB<int>));
For<IMyList<string>>().Use<MyListA<string>>();
For<IMyList<string>>().Use<MyListB<string>>();
}
private object DecorateMyList(object o)
{
var genericParameters = o.GetType().GetGenericArguments();
var myListDecoratorType = typeof(MyListDecorator<>).MakeGenericType(genericParameters);
var decorated = Activator.CreateInstance(myListDecoratorType, new []{o});
return decorated;
}
}
public class MyRegistryUser
{
ObjectFactory.GetInstance<IMyList<string>>(); // Good: Returns an instance of MyListB<string> as expected
ObjectFactory.GetInstance<IMyList<int>>(); // Bad: Returns an instance of the decorator containing MyListB<int> - my second rule should have overridden the EnrichWith as well.
}
Am I right to think that there is a glitch in structure map or is there something I'm not seeing?
Thanks in advance
I have code like this:
//Fields
Product _prod, _existingProd;
void Test()
{
_prod = MakeAndPopulateSomeRandomProduct();
_existingProd = GetProdFromDb(1);
Mapper.CreateMap()
.AfterMap((s, d) =>
{
Console.WriteLine(d==_existingProd); //Why does this print false?
//Customize other properties on destination object
});
Mapper.Map(_prod, _existingProd);
}
When I call Test(), false is printed but I expected true. In my scenario, it is important to be able to access the original destination object via the AfterMap argument. I only included the fields to demonstrate the problem but in my real code, I don't have direct access to them. How can I access the object instances passed in to Map() when customizing the mapping?
The following example works. Probably you are using some type converter which creates new instance... Also please provide all mapping configurations to better understand the problem.
[TestFixture]
public class AfterMap_Test
{
//Fields
private Product _prod, _existingProd;
[Test]
public void Test()
{
Mapper.CreateMap<Product, Product>()
.AfterMap((s, d) =>
{
Trace.WriteLine(d == _existingProd); //Why does this print false?
//Customize other properties on destination object
});
_existingProd = new Product {P1 = "Destination"};
_prod = new Product {P1 = "Source"};
Mapper.Map(_prod, _existingProd);
}
}
internal class Product
{
public string P1 { get; set; }
}
Any idea how to do what the title says? Only thing I found was on the original Velocity site, and I don't think
ve.setProperty( RuntimeConstants.RUNTIME_LOG_LOGSYSTEM_CLASS,
"org.apache.velocity.runtime.log.Log4JLogChute" );
ve.setProperty("runtime.log.logsystem.log4j.logger",
LOGGER_NAME);
will work wonderfully well on .NET. I am using log4net, which should make it quite easy, but the documentation on NVelocity is really a mess.
Implement NVelocity.Runtime.Log.ILogSystem (you could write a simple implementation that bridges to log4net) and set this impl type in the property RuntimeConstants.RUNTIME_LOG_LOGSYSTEM_CLASS
How I got this information:
Get the code.
Search for "log" in the codebase
Discover the classes in NVelocity.Runtime.Log.
Read those classes' source, they're very simple and thoroughly documented.
Update:
Currently, NVelocity does not support logging. The initializeLogger() and Log() methods in RuntimeInstance Class are commented out.
If you need to log, uncomment the two methods, add a private ILogSystem logSystem; property
Here's our on-the-fly implementation:
public class RuntimeInstance : IRuntimeServices
{
private ILogSystem logSystem;
...
...
private void initializeLogger()
{
logSystem = LogManager.CreateLogSystem(this);
}
...
...
private void Log(LogLevel level, Object message)
{
String output = message.ToString();
logSystem.LogVelocityMessage(level, output);
}
...
}
Then, we implemented ILogSystem for log4net
using log4net;
using NVelocity.Runtime;
using NVelocity.Runtime.Log;
namespace Services.Templates
{
public class Log4NetILogSystem : ILogSystem
{
private readonly ILog _log;
public Log4NetILogSystem(ILog log )
{
_log = log;
}
public void Init(IRuntimeServices rs)
{
}
public void LogVelocityMessage(LogLevel level, string message)
{
switch (level)
{
case LogLevel.Debug:
_log.Debug(message);
break;
case LogLevel.Info:
_log.Info(message);
break;
case LogLevel.Warn:
_log.Warn(message);
break;
case LogLevel.Error:
_log.Error(message);
break;
}
}
}
}
Then, when creating the engine:
var engine = new VelocityEngine();
var props = new ExtendedProperties();
props.SetProperty(RuntimeConstants.RUNTIME_LOG_LOGSYSTEM,
new Log4NetILogSystem(LogManager.GetLogger(typeof(NVelocityEngine))));
engine.Init(props);