DOCSLIB.ORG

The Junit Unit Testing Framework Sunit Xunit (1) Xunit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Junit Unit Testing Framework Sunit Xunit (1) Xunit xUnit (1) The JUnit Unit Testing Framework xUnit is a family of unit testing frameworks that follow the architecture of the SUnit unit testing framework for the SmallTalk programming language. Péter Jeszenszky JUnit was the first member of the xUnit family that became widely used and popular. Over the years JUnit have been ported to many other programming 2021.05.09. languages. Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 1 / 25 Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 3 / 25 SUnit xUnit (3) Other notable members of the xUnit family: C++: SUnit is a unit testing framework for the SmallTalk programming language that is considered to be the mother of all unit testing frameworks. CppUnit (license: GNU LGPLv2.1) https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/cppunit/ It was written by Kent Beck in 1994. .NET: Website: http://sunit.sourceforge.net/ NUnit (license: MIT License) https://nunit.org/ See: Martin Fowler. xUnit. 17 January 2006. https://github.com/nunit/nunit https://martinfowler.com/bliki/Xunit.html Python: unittest (license: Python Software Foundation License) https://docs.python.org/3/library/unittest.html Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 2 / 25 Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 4 / 25 JUnit History Architecture (1) JUnit was written by Kent Beck and Erich Gamma in 1997. JUnit 5 has a modular structure: The current major version is 5. JUnit 5 = JUnit Platform + JUnit Jupiter + JUnit Vintage Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 5 / 25 Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 7 / 25 JUnit Availability Architecture (2) JUnit Platform: It serves as a foundation for launching testing frameworks on the JVM. It defines the TestEngine API for developing License: Eclipse Public License 2.0 testing frameworks that runs on the platform. It also provides a Website: https://junit.org/junit5/ ConsoleLauncher to launch the platform from the command line. Repository: https://github.com/junit-team/junit5 JUnit Platform is supported by popular IDEs (e.g., IntelliJ IDEA, Maven Central: JUnit artifacts are available in Maven Central Eclipse, NetBeans, and Visual Studio Code) and build tools (e.g., The list of JUnit artifacts: https://junit.org/junit5/docs/current/user- Apache Maven and Gradle). guide/#dependency-metadata Documentation: JUnit Jupiter: It defines a programming model and an extension JUnit 5 User Guide https://junit.org/junit5/docs/current/user-guide/ model for writing tests and extensions in JUnit 5. It also provides a Javadoc: https://junit.org/junit5/docs/current/api/ TestEngine for running Jupiter based tests on the platform. JUnit Vintage: provides a TestEngine for running JUnit 3 and JUnit 4 based tests on the platform. Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 6 / 25 Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 8 / 25 IDE support Test Classes and Methods (1) Test class: any top-level class, static member class, or @Nested class that contains at least one test method. Must not be abstract and must have a single constructor. Apache NetBeans: Writing JUnit Tests in NetBeans IDE http://netbeans.apache.org/kb/docs/java/junit-intro.html Test method: any instance method that is annotated with @Test, @RepeatedTest, @ParameterizedTest, @TestFactory, or Eclipse IDE: @TestTemplate. IntelliJ IDEA: https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/testing.html Lifecycle Method: any method that is annotated with @BeforeAll, @AfterAll, @BeforeEach, or @AfterEach. Methods annotated with @BeforeAll and @AfterAll must be static (unless the @TestInstance(Lifecycle.PER_CLASS) annotation is present). Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 9 / 25 Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 11 / 25 Apache Maven Support Test Classes and Methods (2) Test classes, test methods, and lifecycle methods are not required to be Apache Maven Surefire https://maven.apache.org/surefire/ public, but they must not be private. https://github.com/apache/maven-surefire Test methods and lifecycle methods: Maven Surefire Plugin May be declared locally within the current test class, inherited from https://maven.apache.org/surefire/maven-surefire-plugin/ superclasses, or inherited from interfaces. Maven Surefire Report Plugin Must not be abstract and must not return a value. https://maven.apache.org/surefire/maven-surefire-report-plugin/ Both test constructors and methods are permitted to have parameters that enables dependency injection for constructors and methods. Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 10 / 25 Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 12 / 25 Test Execution Lifecycle (1) Test Execution Lifecycle (3) Example: @BeforeAll static method invoked By default, JUnit creates a new instance of each test class before executing Constructor creates LifeCycleTest@2145433b each test method that allows individual test methods to be executed in @BeforeEach method invoked on LifeCycleTest@2145433b isolation. testMethod1() method invoked on LifeCycleTest@2145433b This “per-method” behavior can be changed, to execute all test methods on @AfterEach method invoked on LifeCycleTest@2145433b the same test instance, annotate a test class with Constructor creates LifeCycleTest@fdefd3f @TestInstance(Lifecycle.PER_CLASS). @BeforeEach method invoked on LifeCycleTest@fdefd3f testMethod2() method invoked on LifeCycleTest@fdefd3f @AfterEach method invoked on LifeCycleTest@fdefd3f @AfterAll static method invoked Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 13 / 25 Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 15 / 25 Test Execution Lifecycle (2) Test Execution Order Example: import org.junit.jupiter.api.*; public class LifeCycleTest { By default, test methods will be ordered using an algorithm that is LifeCycleTest() { deterministic but intentionally nonobvious. This ensures that subsequent System.out.printf("Constructor creates %s\n", this); } runs of a test suite execute test methods in the same order, thereby @BeforeAll allowing for repeatable builds. static void beforeAll() { System.out.println("@BeforeAll static method invoked"); } @AfterAll Although true unit tests typically should not rely on the order in which they static void afterAll() { System.out.println("@AfterAll static method invoked"); } are executed, there are times when it is necessary to enforce a specific test @BeforeEach void beforeEach() { System.out.printf("@BeforeEach method invoked on %s\n", this); } method execution order. @AfterEach void afterEach() { System.out.printf("@AfterEach method invoked on %s\n", this); } The @TestMethodOrder annotation is provided to control the order in @Test which test methods are executed. void testMethod1() { System.out.printf("testMethod1() method invoked on %s\n", this); } @Test void testMethod2() { System.out.printf("testMethod2() method invoked on %s\n", this); } } Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 14 / 25 Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 16 / 25 Related Libraries and Frameworks (1) Related Libraries and Frameworks (3) Assertion/matcher libraries: AssertJ (license: Apache License 2.0) https://assertj.github.io/doc/ Databases: https://github.com/assertj/assertj-core DbUnit (license: GNU LGPLv2.1) http://dbunit.sourceforge.net/ Hamcrest http://hamcrest.org/ Headless browsers: Java Hamcrest (license: BSD 3-Clause License) http://hamcrest.org/JavaHamcrest/ HtmlUnit (license: Apache License 2.0) https://github.com/hamcrest/JavaHamcrest https://htmlunit.sourceforge.io/ https://github.com/HtmlUnit/htm PyHamcrest (license: BSD 3-Clause License) https://github.com/hamcrest/PyHamcrest ... Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 17 / 25 Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 19 / 25 Related Libraries and Frameworks (2) Capturing System.out with System Lambda (1) Mocking frameworks: The System Lambda library provides support for testing code that uses EasyMock (license: Apache License 2.0) https://easymock.org/ java.lang.System. https://github.com/easymock/easymock License: MIT License Mockito (license: MIT License) https://site.mockito.org/ Repository: https://github.com/stefanbirkner/system-lambda https://github.com/mockito/mockito Availability in Maven Central: PowerMock (license: Apache License 2.0) com.github.stefanbirkner:system-lambda:1.2.0 https://github.com/powermock/powermock Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 18 / 25 Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 20 / 25 Capturing System.out with System Lambda (2) Examples from the Industry: Apache Commons Lang (1) Example: org.apache.commons.lang3.StringUtils: @Test StringUtils.java void testMain() throws Exception { Javadoc String output = tapSystemOut(() -> HelloWorld.main( JUnit 5 unit tests: new String[] {})); StringUtilsContainsTest.java assertEquals("Hello, World!\n", output); StringUtilsSubstringTest.java } StringUtilsTest.java Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 21 / 25 Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 23 / 25 Capturing System.out with System Lambda (3) Examples from the Industry: Apache Commons Lang (2) The methods with the suffix Normalized normalize line breaks to \n so that you can run tests with the same assertions on different operating systems. org.apache.commons.lang3.BitField: Example: BitField.java @Test Javadoc void testMain() throws Exception { BitFieldTest.java String output = tapSystemOutNormalized(() -> HelloWorld.main(new String[] {})); assertEquals("Hello, World!\n", output); } Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 22 / 25 Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 24 / 25 Further Recommended Reading Cătălin Tudose. JUnit in Action. 3rd ed. Manning Publications, 2021. https://github.com/ctudose/junit-in-action-third-edition Boni Garcia. Mastering Software Testing with JUnit 5. Packt Publishing, 2017. https://github.com/PacktPublishing/Mastering- Software-Testing-with-JUnit-5 Péter Jeszenszky The JUnit Unit Testing Framework 2021.05.09. 25 / 25.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Towards a Taxonomy of Sunit Tests *
    Towards a Taxonomy of SUnit Tests ? Markus G¨alli a Michele Lanza b Oscar Nierstrasz a aSoftware Composition Group Institut f¨urInformatik und angewandte Mathematik Universit¨atBern, Switzerland bFaculty of Informatics University of Lugano, Switzerland Abstract Although unit testing has gained popularity in recent years, the style and granularity of individual unit tests may vary wildly. This can make it difficult for a developer to understand which methods are tested by which tests, to what degree they are tested, what to take into account while refactoring code and tests, and to assess the value of an existing test. We have manually categorized the test base of an existing object-oriented system in order to derive a first taxonomy of unit tests. We have then developed some simple tools to semi-automatically categorize tests according to this taxonomy, and applied these tools to two case studies. As it turns out, the vast majority of unit tests focus on a single method, which should make it easier to associate tests more tightly to the methods under test. In this paper we motivate and present our taxonomy, we describe the results of our case studies, and we present our approach to semi-automatic unit test categorization. 1 Key words: unit testing, taxonomy, reverse engineering 1 13th International European Smalltalk Conference (ESUG 2005) http://www.esug.org/conferences/thirteenthinternationalconference2005 ? We thank St´ephane Ducasse for his helpful comments and gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Swiss National Science Foundation for the project “Tools and Techniques for Decomposing and Composing Software” (SNF Project No.
    [Show full text]
  • 2.5 the Unit Test Framework (UTF)
    Masaryk University Faculty of Informatics C++ Unit Testing Frameworks Diploma Thesis Brno, January 2010 Miroslav Sedlák i Statement I declare that this thesis is my original work of authorship which I developed individually. I quote properly full reference to all sources I used while developing. ...…………..……… Miroslav Sedlák Acknowledgements I am grateful to RNDr. Jan Bouda, Ph.D. for his inspiration and productive discussion. I would like to thank my family and girlfriend for the encouragement they provided. Last, but not least, I would like to thank my friends Ing.Michal Bella who was very supportive in verifying the architecture of the extension of Unit Test Framework and Mgr. Irena Zigmanová who helped me with proofreading of this thesis. ii Abstract The aim of this work is to gather, clearly present and test the use of existing UTFs (CppUnit, CppUnitLite, CppUTest, CxxTest and other) and supporting tools for software project development in the programming language C++. We will compare the advantages and disadvantages of UTFs and theirs tools. Another challenge is to design effective solutions for testing by using one of the UTFs in dependence on the result of analysis. Keywords C++, Unit Test (UT), Test Framework (TF), Unit Test Framework (UTF), Test Driven Development (TDD), Refactoring, xUnit, Standard Template Library (STL), CppUnit, CppUnitLite, CppUTest Run-Time Type Information (RTTI), Graphical User Interface (GNU). iii Contents 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Enhancement in Nunit Testing Framework by Binding Logging with Unit Testing
    International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), India Online ISSN: 2319-7064 Enhancement in Nunit Testing Framework by binding Logging with Unit testing Viraj Daxini1, D. A. Parikh2 1Gujarat Technological University, L. D. College of Engineering, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India 2Associate Professor and Head, Department of Computer Engineering, L. D. College of Engineering, Ahmadabad, Gujarat, India Abstract: This paper describes the new testing library named log4nunit testing library which is enhanced version of nunit testing library as it is binded to logging functionality. NUnit is similar to xunit testing family in all that cases are built directly to the code of the project. Log4NUnit testing library provides the capability to log the results of tests along with testing classes. It also provides the capability to log the messages from within the testing methods. It supplies extension of NUnit’s Test class method in terms of logging the results. It has functionality to log the entity of test cases, based on the Logging framework, to document the test settings which is done at the time of testing, test case execution and it’s results. Attractive feature of new library is that it will redirect the log message to console at runtime if Log4net library is not present in the class path. It will make easy for those users who do not want to download Logging framework and put it in their class path. Log4NUnit also include a Log4net logger methods and implements utility of logging methods such as info, debug, warn, fatal etc. This work was prompted due to lack of published results concerning the implementation of Log4NUnit.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Unit Testing
    INTRODUCTION TO UNIT TESTING In C#, you can think of a unit as a method. You thus write a unit test by writing something that tests a method. For example, let’s say that we had the aforementioned Calculator class and that it contained an Add(int, int) method. Let’s say that you want to write some code to test that method. public class CalculatorTester { public void TestAdd() { var calculator = new Calculator(); if (calculator.Add(2, 2) == 4) Console.WriteLine("Success"); else Console.WriteLine("Failure"); } } Let’s take a look now at what some code written for an actual unit test framework (MS Test) looks like. [TestClass] public class CalculatorTests { [TestMethod] public void TestMethod1() { var calculator = new Calculator(); Assert.AreEqual(4, calculator.Add(2, 2)); } } Notice the attributes, TestClass and TestMethod. Those exist simply to tell the unit test framework to pay attention to them when executing the unit test suite. When you want to get results, you invoke the unit test runner, and it executes all methods decorated like this, compiling the results into a visually pleasing report that you can view. Let’s take a look at your top 3 unit test framework options for C#. MSTest/Visual Studio MSTest was actually the name of a command line tool for executing tests, MSTest ships with Visual Studio, so you have it right out of the box, in your IDE, without doing anything. With MSTest, getting that setup is as easy as File->New Project. Then, when you write a test, you can right click on it and execute, having your result displayed in the IDE One of the most frequent knocks on MSTest is that of performance.
    [Show full text]
  • Taming Functional Web Testing with Spock and Geb
    Taming Functional Web Testing with Spock and Geb Peter Niederwieser, Gradleware Creator, Spock Contributor, Geb The Actors Spock, Geb, Page Objects Spock “Spock is a testing and specification framework for Java and Groovy applications. What makes it stand out from the crowd is its beautiful and highly expressive specification language. Thanks to its JUnit runner, Spock is compatible with most IDEs, build tools, and continuous integration servers. Spock is inspired from JUnit, RSpec, jMock, Mockito, Groovy, Scala, Vulcans, and other fascinating life forms. Spock (ctd.) http://spockframework.org ASL2 licence Serving mankind since 2008 Latest releases: 0.7, 1.0-SNAPSHOT Java + Groovy JUnit compatible Loves Geb Geb “Geb is a browser automation solution. It brings together the power of WebDriver, the elegance of jQuery content selection, the robustness of Page Object modelling and the expressiveness of the Groovy language. It can be used for scripting, scraping and general automation — or equally as a functional/web/acceptance testing solution via integration with testing frameworks such as Spock, JUnit & TestNG. Geb (ctd.) http://gebish.org ASL2 license Serving mankind since 2009 Latest releases: 0.7.2, 1.0-SNAPSHOT Java + Groovy Use with any test framework Loves Spock First-class page objects Page Objects “The Page Object pattern represents the screens of your web app as a series of objects. Within your web app's UI, there are areas that your tests interact with. A Page Object simply models these as objects within the test code. This reduces the amount of duplicated code and means that if the UI changes, the fix need only be applied in one place.
    [Show full text]
  • Pragmatic Unit Testingin Java 8 with Junit
    www.it-ebooks.info www.it-ebooks.info Early praise for Pragmatic Unit Testing in Java 8 with JUnit Langr, Hunt, and Thomas demonstrate, with abundant detailed examples, how unit testing with JUnit works in the real world. Beyond just showing simple iso- lated examples, they address the hard issues–things like mock objects, databases, multithreading, and getting started with automated unit testing. Buy this book and keep it on your desk, as you’ll want to refer to it often. ➤ Mike Cohn Author of Succeeding with Agile, Agile Estimating and Planning, and User Stories Applied Working from a realistic application, Jeff gives us the reasons behind unit testing, the basics of using JUnit, and how to organize your tests. This is a super upgrade to an already good book. If you have the original, you’ll find valuable new ideas in this one. And if you don’t have the original, what’s holding you back? ➤ Ron Jeffries www.ronjeffries.com Rational, balanced, and devoid of any of the typical religious wars surrounding unit testing. Top-drawer stuff from Jeff Langr. ➤ Sam Rose This book is an excellent resource for those new to the unit testing game. Experi- enced developers should also at the very least get familiar with the very helpful acronyms. ➤ Colin Yates Principal Architect, QFI Consulting, LLP www.it-ebooks.info We've left this page blank to make the page numbers the same in the electronic and paper books. We tried just leaving it out, but then people wrote us to ask about the missing pages.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Analysis of Junit and Testng Framework
    International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056 Volume: 05 Issue: 05 | May-2018 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072 Comparative Analysis of JUnit and TestNG framework Manasi Patil1, Mona Deshmukh2 Student, Dept. of MCA, VES Institute of Technology, Maharashtra, India1 Professor, Dept. of MCA, VES Institute of Technology, Maharashtra, India2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------***--------------------------------------------------------------------- Abstract - Testing is an important phase in SDLC, Testing It is flexible than Junit and supports parametrization, parallel can be manual or automated. Nowadays Automation testing is execution and data driven testing. widely used to find defects and to ensure the correctness and The Table – 1 compares different functionalities of TestNG completeness of the software. Open source framework can be and JUnit framework. used for automation testing such as Robotframework, Junit, Spock, NUnit, TestNG, Jasmin, Mocha etc. This paper compares Table -1: Functionality TestNG vs JUnit JUnit and TestNG based on their features and functionalities. Key Words: JUnit, TestNG, Automation Framework, Functionality TestNG JUnit Automation Testing, Selenium TestNG, Selenium JUnit Yes 1. INTRODUCTION Support Annotations Yes Yes Support Test Suit Initialization Yes Testing a software manually is tedious work, and takes lot of No time and efforts. Automation saves lot of time and money, Support for Tests groups Yes also it increases the test coverage
    [Show full text]
  • A Large-Scale Study on the Usage of Testing Patterns That Address Maintainability Attributes Patterns for Ease of Modification, Diagnoses, and Comprehension
    A Large-Scale Study on the Usage of Testing Patterns that Address Maintainability Attributes Patterns for Ease of Modification, Diagnoses, and Comprehension Danielle Gonzalez ∗, Joanna C.S. Santos∗, Andrew Popovich∗, Mehdi Mirakhorli∗, Mei Nagappany ∗Software Engineering Department, Rochester Institute of Technology, USA yDavid R. Cheriton School of Computer Science, University of Waterloo, Canada fdng2551,jds5109,ajp7560, [email protected], [email protected] Abstract—Test case maintainability is an important concern, studies [5], [10], [12], [21] emphasize that the maintainability especially in open source and distributed development envi- and readability attributes of the unit tests directly affect the ronments where projects typically have high contributor turn- number of defects detected in the production code. Further- over with varying backgrounds and experience, and where code ownership changes often. Similar to design patterns, patterns more, achieving high code coverage requires evolving and for unit testing promote maintainability quality attributes such maintaining a growing number of unit tests. Like source code, as ease of diagnoses, modifiability, and comprehension. In this poorly organized or hard-to-read test code makes test main- paper, we report the results of a large-scale study on the usage tenance and modification difficult, impacting defect identifi- of four xUnit testing patterns which can be used to satisfy these cation effectiveness. In “xUnit Test Patterns: Refactoring Test maintainability attributes. This is a first-of-its-kind study which developed automated techniques to investigate these issues across Code” George Meszaro [18] presents a set of automated unit 82,447 open source projects, and the findings provide more insight testing patterns, and promotes the idea of applying patterns to into testing practices in open source projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Smart BDD Testing Using Cucumber and Jacoco
    www.hcltech.com Smart BDD Testing Using Cucumber and JaCoCo Business assurance $ Testing AuthOr: Arish Arbab is a Software Engineer at HCL Singapore Pte Limited, having expertize on Agile GUI/API Automation methodologies. WHITEPAPER ApriL 2015 SMART BDD TESTING USING CUCUMBER AND JACOCO | APRIL 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 3 PROBLEM FACED 3 SOLUTION APPROACH 4 BENEFITS 6 IMPROVEMENTS 7 APPLICABILITY TO OTHER PROJECTS 7 UPCOMING FEATURES 7 REFERENCES 8 APPRECIATIONS RECEIVED 8 ABOUT HCL 9 © 2015, HCL TECHNOLOGIES. REPRODUCTION PROHIBITED. THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED UNDER COPYRIGHT BY THE AUTHOR, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 2 SMART BDD TESTING USING CUCUMBER AND JACOCO | APRIL 2015 INTRODUCTION Behavioral Driven Development (BDD) testing uses natural language to describe the “desired behavior” of the system that can be understood by the developer, tester and the customer. It is a synthesis and refinement of practices stemming from TDD and ATDD. It describes behaviors in a single notation that is directly accessible to domain experts, testers and developers for improving communication. It focuses on implementing only those behaviors, which contribute most directly to the business outcomes for optimizing the scenarios. PROBLEM FACED By using the traditional automation approach, and if given a summary report of automated tests to the business analysts, then it is guaranteed that the report would be met with a blank expression. This makes it tricky to prove that the tests are correct— do they match the requirement and, if this changes, what tests need to change to reflect this? The whole idea behind BDD is to write tests in plain English, describing the behaviors of the thing that you are testing.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Testing Framework for C-Programming Exercises
    Int'l Conf. Frontiers in Education: CS and CE | FECS'15 | 279 A new Testing Framework for C-Programming Exercises and Online-Assessments Dieter Pawelczak, Andrea Baumann, and David Schmudde Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Universitaet der Bundeswehr Muenchen (UniBw M), Neubiberg, Germany Abstract - Difficulties with learning a programming assessment and grading of programming assignments in the language are wide spread in engineering education. The use third year now. However the original aim to have many of a single integrated programming environment for coding, small accompanying programming exercises for self- debugging, automated testing and online assessment lowers learning could not be established yet, due to the high effort the initial burdens for novice programmers. We have for writing tests. In this paper we present a new testing developed the Virtual-C IDE especially for learning and framework, which enormously reduces the effort for test teaching the C programming language with an integrated development. Although this framework allows students to framework for program visualizations, programming exer- write their own tests, we do not plan to integrate test cises and online assessments. A new enhancement of the writing in the primer C programming course at the moment, IDE is a xUnit like testing framework allowing on the one as our curriculum covers software testing in the software hand larger sets of small, test-based programming exercises engineering courses in the major terms. and on the other hand simplifying the development of pro- gramming assignments. The integration of the new testing 2 Review of related work framework in the assessment system gives students a better and direct feedback on their programming achievements Software testing is a core topic in computer science.
    [Show full text]
  • Xunit Test Patterns and Smells Instructor Biography
    xUnit Test Patterns and Smells xUnit Test Patterns and Smells Improving Test Code and Testability Through Refactoring Gerard Meszaros [email protected] Tutorial exercises and solutions available at: http://tutorialslides.xunitpatterns.com http://tutorialexercises.xunitpatterns.com http://tutorialsolutions.xunitpatterns.com xUnit Patterns Tutorial V1 1 Copyright 2008 Gerard Meszaros xUnit Test Patterns and Smells Instructor Biography Gerard Meszaros is independent consultant specializing is agile development processes. Gerard built his first unit testing framework in 1996 and has been doing automated unit testing ever since. He is an expert in agile methods, test automation patterns, refactoring of software and tests, and design for testability. Gerard has applied automated unit and acceptance testing on projects ranging from full-on eXtreme Programming to traditional waterfall development and technologies ranging from Java, Smalltalk and Ruby to PLSQL stored procedures and SAP’s ABAP. He is the author of the book xUnit Test Patterns – Gerard Meszaros Refactoring Test Code. [email protected] xUnit Patterns Tutorial V1 2 Copyright 2008 Gerard Meszaros 1 xUnit Test Patterns and Smells Tutorial Background • Early XP projects suffered from – High Test Maintenance Cost – Obscure, Verbose Tests • Started documenting practices as Smells & Patterns at xunitpatterns.com • Clients requested Hands-on Training – 2 Day computer-based course – Available in Java, C#, C++ (other languages possible) • Condensed into half day & full day
    [Show full text]
  • Patterns of Test Oracles - a Testing Tool Perspective
    Patterns of Test Oracles - A Testing Tool Perspective YUNG-PIN CHENG, Dept. of CSIE, National Central University, TAIWAN TSUNG-LIN YANG, Dept. of CSIE, National Central University, TAIWAN Continuous integration (CI) has become a state-of-art software engineering practice in modern software industry. The key practice in CI is automatic test regression. A successful test automation can provide immediate feedback to developers and then encourages frequent code change to meet the spirit of agile methods. Unfortunately, the cost of building test automation varies significantly from different application domains. It is often inevitable to adopt testing tools of different levels to ensure the effectiveness of test regression. While adopting these testing tools, it is required to add test oracles by developers to determine whether a test is passed or failed. Nevertheless, there are dif- ferent kinds of test oracles to choose, understand, and apply. Sometimes, a testing tool may constrain the feasibility and selection of test oracles. It is important for developers to understand the pros and cons of test oracles in different testing tools. In this paper, patterns of test oracles are described, particularly from a testing-tool perspective in practice. These patterns are collected to clarify possible confusion and misunderstanding in building test oracles. Categories and Subject Descriptors: H.5.2 [Software and Its Engineering ]: Software testing and debugging—test oracles General Terms: Software Testing Additional Key Words and Phrases: Software Testing, Test Oracle, Test Automation, Regression Testing, Assertion ACM Reference Format: Cheng, Y.-P. and Yang, T.-L. 2017. Patterns of Test Oracles - A Testing Tool Perspective.
    [Show full text]