pyunit-interest

[Pyunit-interest] Passing a object to my test case from mainthread using unittest

[venkat <ven...@vo...>]

i am new to python and just now started developing an linux application 
automation.

scenario i am trying is

thread.py --- will invoke all primary device threads and load test from 
testcase

admincase.py --- hold my tests for the case..

what i am unable to do is i want to pass certain objects from thread.py 
to admincase.py when loading the test. how do i do that..

object which i am tryin to pass is (*EppQueue*)

thread.py code

|import  threading
import  sys
import  time
import  logging
import  os
import  Queue
from  EPPimport  EPP
import  ldtp
import  ldtputils
from  functionsimport  functions
from  admincasesimport  admincases
import  unittest

#logging.basicConfig(level=logging.DEBUG,
#                    format='(%(threadName)-10s) %(message)s',
#                    )
class  inittest(unittest.TestCase):
     global  fun
     global  EppQueue
     global  window_name

     def  cleanup(epp_port):
         if  os.path.exists(epp_port):
             os.unlink(epp_port)

     def  start_threads(EppQueue,server_ip,epp_port):
         epp=  EPP
         EPP1=  threading.Thread(name='EPP',  target=epp,  args=(server_ip,54321,epp_port,EppQueue,))
         EPP1.setDaemon(True)
         EPP1.start()
         return  epp
     fun=  functions()
     EppQueue  =  Queue.Queue(1)
     server_ip='192.168.10.125'
     epp_port='/dev/ttyS17'
     print  "Starting"
     cleanup(epp_port)
     print  "Clean up Over"
     epp=  start_threads(EppQueue,server_ip,epp_port)
     raw_input("###### Please Start the main appilcation in the ATM and hit a KEY to continue ############")
     check=  0
     while  check==  0:
         window_name=  fun.start_up_verify('atm_main_app')
         if  any(window_name):
             check=  1
         else:
             check=  0
     if  not  any(window_name):
         print  "Please start the application and run the test"
         sys.exit(0)
     else:
         print  window_name
         print  "SYSTEM IS READY TO PERFORM TEST"
         raw_input("###### HIT ANY KEY TO START UNIT TEST ############")
         raw_input("kkk")      
         test=  unittest.defaultTestLoader.loadTestsFromName("admincases")
         unittest.TextTestRunner(verbosity=2).run(test)
     raw_input("keyy")
     print  "final"
|

admincase.py code

|import  unittest
from  functionsimport  functions
import  time
import  Queue

class  admincases(unittest.TestCase):
     global  fun
     global  EppQueue
     global  window_name

     def  test_case_1(self):
         print  "test case 1"
         window_name=  'frmatm_main_app'
         fun.send_queue(self.EppQueue,"send_keys,&&&&&")
         fun.verify_screen(window_name,"ico0")
         fun.send_queue(self.EppQueue,"send_keys,C")
         fun.verify_screen(window_name,"ManagementFunctions")
         fun.send_queue(self.EppQueue,"send_keys,001234")
         fun.verify_screen(window_name,"MainMenu")
         fun.send_queue(self.EppQueue,"send_keys,1")
         fun.verify_screen(window_name,"Diagnostics")
         fun.send_queue(self.EppQueue,"send_keys,1")
         fun.verify_screen(window_name,"TerminalStatus")
         fun.send_queue(self.EppQueue,"send_keys,2")
         time.sleep(10)
         fun.send_queue(self.EppQueue,"send_keys,####****")


     fun=  functions()
     #EppQueue = Queue.Queue(1)
|

Need some assistance on this...

-- 
Regards
Venkat.S

[Pyunit-interest] why assertEqual's msg parameter is designed to obscure the '%s != %s' diagnostic?

[Phlip <phl...@gm...>]

PyUnit:

(Long time first time!)

The various assertions are not DRY when they force you to repeat any automatic 
diagnostic in a message string, if you provide it.

Here's an example:

     def assertEqual(self, first, second, msg=None):
         self.assert_((first == second), msg or '%s != %s' % (first, second))

I think it should work like this:

     def assertEqual(self, first, second, msg=''):
         self.assert_((first == second),
		(msg + ('\n%s != %s' % (first, second))).strip())

That way if you provide a message (such as a message describing the semantic 
_meaning_ why "41" should not equal "42"), the assertion does not throw away the 
"41" and "42".

Reflecting the source expressions passed in first and second is left as an 
exercise for the reader. C-:

-- 
   Phlip
   http://zeekland.zeroplayer.com/Uncle_Wiggilys_Travels/1

Re: [Pyunit-interest] unittest and __init__

[Frank M. <fm...@qu...>]

At 02:14 PM 10/9/2009, Ori Peleg wrote:
>Sure, I've done it with <baseclassname>.__init__ and it worked fine, 
>but super() should work just as well - class TestCase itself doesn't 
>use either method, so whatever you choose you won't be in conflict.
>
>I just checked, and in Python 2.7 they converted to super() (see 
><http://svn.python.org/view/python/trunk/Lib/unittest/case.py?view=markup>case.py 
>and 
><http://svn.python.org/view/python/trunk/Lib/unittest/runner.py?view=markup>runner.py), 
>so you're probably better off using super() instead for future-proofing.

Thank you!!!!

Frank 

Re: [Pyunit-interest] unittest and __init__

[Frank M. <fm...@qu...>]

At 01:34 AM 10/9/2009, Ori Peleg wrote:
>It's better not to mix and match, like you said.
>PyUnit itself uses <baseclassname>.__init__ and not super(), so 
>that's what I would suggest.

How strange . . . you are correct.

For its own base class calls unittest.py uses <baseclassname> as you stated.

However, there are comments that suggest that the class is "super 
enabled" and will support that.

Thus my concern.

Have you actually done this . . .either way?

Frank 

[Pyunit-interest] unittest and __init__

[Frank M. <fm...@qu...>]

So I have a test suite and I would like to have a __init__ function 
so some things can be done one time instead of each each case like 
setUp() wants to do.

I gather I can create a __init__ function, but that I must call the 
base class __init__ function . . . so far so good.

However, so far I have found three conflicting documents:

1. Says using super() is the way to call the base class under unittest

2. Says calling TestCase.__init__ is the way to call the base class 
under unittest

3. One is a long dissertation of the evils of super() and how a class 
hierarchy can either call either base class functions explicitly or 
use super() but not to mix and match.

Clearly one of the documents is wrong.

The question is, which one?

The bottom line is . . . does anyone have a working example of a 
__init__ function in a test suite?

Something that is known to work in a supported way by PyUnit?

Frank

[Pyunit-interest] Extending unittest with a "Master" Fixture setUp and tearDown

[W M. <wil...@pw...>]

Greetings Justa-programmers.

I am new to this list and python in general. I did a ( really ) quick
inspection of the archive for this topic. So if this is old hat, please
don't tar and feather me. 

After about a day of reviewing unittest.py and doing the google shuffle,
I managed to extend unittest to run a master_setUp() and
master_tearDown() method from my derived TestCase. 

The reasoning behind this was to avoid unnecessary socket
connections/disconnects/reconnections. I needed:

Running Master Set-up 1   -- Connection to Server
setUp 1  -- Test Local setUp
test_1 1  -- Run Test
tearDown 1  -- Test Local tearDown
.setUp 1
test_2 1
tearDown 1
.setUp 1
test_3 1
tearDown 1
.Running Master tearDown 1  -- Disconnection from Server

Where I had three Tests,test_1 test_2 test_3, embedded in my TestCase
derived class, each of which could share the socket connection.

I could not find any similar code to this. I had considered py.test b/c
it touts this functionality as one of its features,
http://codespeak.net/py/current/doc/test.html#managing-test-state-across-test-modules-classes-and-methods . 
I found this implementation cumbersome and confusing, but it did work
for what I needed. In my experience, this is a useful feature when
configuring a hardware device for an actual test fixture. Alas, I was
sure the strong design of unittest would lend to it being extended in
this way. 

So for the google cache, I submit the following example of how I solved
this issue. Please, any comments upon how this could be improved or
simpler ways to accomplish the same result are welcomed. ( FYI: I use
tabs ) I can attach as file, if that is preferred.

Sincerely, 
William Meadows

simple_test.py ::
####

#!/usr/bin/python
import sys
import unittest 

class MyTestSuite( unittest.TestSuite ) :
	master_setUpName = "master_setUp"
	master_tearDownName = "master_tearDown"

	def __init__( self, tests = () ) :
		unittest.TestSuite.__init__(self,tests)

		self.numtests = self.countTestCases()
		self.numtestsleft = self.numtests

	def run( self, result ) : 
		for test in self._tests : 
			# Sometimes,when thru unittest.main() a MyTestSuite instance gets
passed here .
			# This instance appears to be a Suite of Suites ...
			# I cannot figure how this get's constructed in unittest ??
			if issubclass( type(test), unittest.TestCase ) :
				if self.numtestsleft == self.countTestCases():
					eval("test.%s"%(self.master_setUpName))()
				self.numtestsleft = self.numtestsleft - 1

			if result.shouldStop : 
				break
			# Run a TestSuite or/ TestCase
			test(result)

			if issubclass( type(test), unittest.TestCase ) :
				if self.numtestsleft == 0 : 
					eval("test.%s"%(self.master_tearDownName))()
		return result

class MyTestLoader( unittest.TestLoader) : 
	suiteClass = MyTestSuite

class SimpleTest( unittest.TestCase ) :  

	num = 1 

	def master_setUp(self):
		print "Running Master Set-up %d " % ( self.num ) 
	def master_tearDown(self):
		print "Running Master tearDown %d " % ( self.num )

	def setUp(self):
		print "setUp %d " % ( self.num )
	def tearDown(self):
		print "tearDown %d " % ( self.num )

	def test_1(self):
		print "test_1 %d " % ( self.num )
	def test_2(self):
		print "test_2 %d " % ( self.num )
	def test_3(self):
		print "test_3 %d " % ( self.num )

class SimpleTest3( SimpleTest ) : 

	num = 3

if __name__ == "__main__" : 
	pickOne = None 
	if len(sys.argv) > 1 : 
		pickOne = int(sys.argv[1])
	
	if pickOne == None : 
		unittest.main( testLoader = MyTestLoader() )
	#/OR
	elif pickOne == 1 : 

unittest.TextTestRunner().run( MyTestLoader().loadTestsFromTestCase(SimpleTest) )

unittest.TextTestRunner().run( MyTestLoader().loadTestsFromTestCase(SimpleTest3) )

####
Sample Output:
####
/* notice testoob fails to work correctly with this modification, no
idea why. Perhaps, it doesn't pick-up the unittest.main( testLoader =
option ) ??

> python /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/unittestgui.py
test_sample.SimpleTest , does not seem to be working either

 */

user@ubuntu:~/tmp/test/unittest$ testoob test_sample.py   
setUp 1
test_1 1
tearDown 1
.setUp 1
test_2 1
tearDown 1
.setUp 1
test_3 1
tearDown 1
.setUp 3
test_1 3
tearDown 3
.setUp 3
test_2 3
tearDown 3
.setUp 3
test_3 3
tearDown 3
.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 6 tests in 0.002s
OK

/* This works */
user@ubuntu:~/tmp/test/unittest$ python test_sample.py
Running Master Set-up 1
setUp 1
test_1 1
tearDown 1
.setUp 1
test_2 1
tearDown 1
.setUp 1
test_3 1
tearDown 1
.Running Master tearDown 1
Running Master Set-up 3
setUp 3
test_1 3
tearDown 3
.setUp 3
test_2 3
tearDown 3
.setUp 3
test_3 3
tearDown 3
.Running Master tearDown 3

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 6 tests in 0.001s

OK

/* this works also */
user@ubuntu:~/tmp/test/unittest$ python test_sample.py 1
Running Master Set-up 1
setUp 1
test_1 1
tearDown 1
.setUp 1
test_2 1
tearDown 1
.setUp 1
test_3 1
tearDown 1
.Running Master tearDown 1

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 3 tests in 0.000s

OK
Running Master Set-up 3
setUp 3
test_1 3
tearDown 3
.setUp 3
test_2 3
tearDown 3
.setUp 3
test_3 3
tearDown 3
.Running Master tearDown 3

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 3 tests in 0.000s

OK


 

[Pyunit-interest] Problem with PyUnit and MySQL

[Desilets, A. <Ala...@nr...>]

Hi all,

I'm trying to write PyUnit tests for an application that is based on =
MySQL, and am experiencing some strange problems. Note that I am an =
experienced PyUnit developer, but a complete newbie at MySQL.

The short code snippet below illustrates the problem I'm having:

=3D=3D Start code
import MySQLdb
import unittest

print "-- finished server_init()"

class MyTest(unittest.TestCase):
   def __init__(self, name):
        unittest.TestCase.__init__(self, name)

   def test_nevermind(self):
      self.fail("Nevermind. If I was able to get this far, it's good")

arguments =3D \
   ['Transana',=20
    u'--datadir=3DC:\\Documents and Settings\\Desiletsa\\Application =
Data\\Transana 2\\databases\\',=20
    '--basedir=3D.',=20
    '--language=3D./share/english']
   =20
# Tests don't run unless you comment out the next line   =20
MySQLdb.server_init(args=3Darguments)

suite_to_run =3D unittest.TestSuite()
suite_to_run.addTest(unittest.makeSuite(MyTest, 'test'))=20
print "-- running the tests"
unittest.TextTestRunner().run(suite_to_run)=20
print "-- finished tests"
=3D=3D=3D=3D End code

Basically, I would expect this code to result in a a failed test. But =
instead, I get the following on STDOUT:

-- finished server_init()
-- running the tests

In other words, the tests never seem to be executed.

The funny thing is that if I comment out the call to =
MySQLdb.server_init(), and run the code again, I get the expected =
output, i.e.:

=3D=3D=3D=3D
-- finished server_init()
-- running the tests
F
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
FAIL: test_nevermind (__main__.MyTest)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "pyUnit_with_MySQL_problem.py", line 11, in test_nevermind
    self.fail("Nevermind. If I was able to get this far, it's good")
AssertionError: Nevermind. If I was able to get this far, it's good

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 1 test in 0.000s

FAILED (failures=3D1)
-- finished tests
=3D=3D=3D=3D

Does anyone have an idea of what is going on here?

Thx

Alain D=E9silets

Re: [Pyunit-interest] Recursive assert_equals.

[Mark G. <mar...@gm...>]

Actually, what you implemented is a comparison method, which you choose to
call assert_equal().

In the xUnit world assert (in every modification) is a method that
immediately throws exception when asserted condition fails. xUnits are Unit
Test tools (not that you are prevented from forcing it into something
different:) ).

Pure terminology, you'll say? You are right! But important one. Assert stop=
s
execution on the failure and unrolls return stack to the error processing
point. I think this should be kept in mind - in order not to distort this
vision created by our peers.No offense.

Sorry for late response - was busy grokking new job.

On 12/6/06, Desilets, Alain <Ala...@nr...> wrote:
>
> Actually, I went ahead and implemented a recursive assert_equal() method.
> It works pretty well. It basically deals with all the primitive types (in=
ts,
> floats, strings, etc), all collections (lists, tuples, dicts) and arbitra=
ry
> objects.
>
> When a difference is found, it provides helpful messages that help you
> drill down from the top to the bottom where the difference was found.
>
> Alain
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Geyzer [mailto:mar...@gm...]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 1:54 AM
> To: Desilets, Alain
> Cc: pyu...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Pyunit-interest] Recursive assert_equals.
>
>
> You may try to convert your dictionaries to strings with "str" or "repr"
> function, and then call assert method on resulting strings. This will sav=
e
> you the hassle of implementing recursive assert, but then - in case of
> failure - you'll have top find the guilty field manually.
>
> If you are not happy with that approach - you'll have to write a method
> that parses your dictionaries and checks each value with an assert - yuck=
s!
>
> BTW, if you are not aware - failed assert INTERRUPTS the test, so that if
> you have more than field with different values - it will throw exception =
on
> the first one checked.
>
> PyUnit is about FrameWork for your tests, that's all; alas, it is not
> about checking complicated data structures.
>
>
> Hope, it helps
>
> On 11/29/06, Desilets, Alain <Ala...@nr...> wrote:
> Is there a way to do a recursive assert_equals on a complex data
> structure?
>
> For example, say I want to assert that two dictionary are "equal". The
> keys of the dictionary are strings, and the values are objects of type
> SomeClass, which, among other things, have an attrigute called
> some_attribute which is of type SomeOtherClass.
>
> I want to write:
>
> Self.assert_equal_recusrsive(expected_dict, got_dict)
>
> And have the system do the following:
>
> - Make sure that expected_dict and got_dict are both of the same type (a
> dictionary in this case)
> - Make sure that they have the same string keys
> - For each string key, make sure that the associated objects are of the
> same type (SomeClass), have the same attributes with same values.
> - In particular for the some_attribute attribute, it would make sure that
> the values are also of the same type (SomeOtherClass), and that they have
> the same attribute values pairs.
>
> Has this been written before? If not would it be doble (it seems to me it
> should be).
>
> I know that in jUnit (Java version), this kind of recursive comparison is
> supported to at least some extend. For example, if I compare two dictionn=
ary
> objects, the system will make sure that the keys are the same and the val=
ues
> too. But it doesn't go recursively into the attributes of objects AFAIK.
>
>
> ----
> Alain D=E9silets, MASc
> Agent de recherches/Research Officer
> Institut de technologie de l'information du CNRC /
> NRC Institute for Information Technology
>
> ala...@nr...
> T=E9l/Tel (613) 990-2813
> Facsimile/t=E9l=E9copieur: (613) 952-7151
>
> Conseil national de recherches Canada, M50, 1200 chemin Montr=E9al,
> Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0R6
> National Research Council Canada, M50, 1200 Montreal Rd., Ottawa, ON
> K1A 0R6
>
> Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net 's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
> your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge&CID=3D=
DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Pyunit-interest mailing list
> Pyu...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pyunit-interest
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mark Geyzer
> Software Engineer,
> tel: 972-52-6782603
>



--=20
Mark Geyzer
Software Engineer,
tel: 972-52-6782603

Re: [Pyunit-interest] Recursive assert_equals.

[Desilets, A. <Ala...@nr...>]

Actually, I went ahead and implemented a recursive assert_equal() =
method. It works pretty well. It basically deals with all the primitive =
types (ints, floats, strings, etc), all collections (lists, tuples, =
dicts) and arbitrary objects.

When a difference is found, it provides helpful messages that help you =
drill down from the top to the bottom where the difference was found.

Alain


-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Geyzer [mailto:mar...@gm...]=20
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 1:54 AM
To: Desilets, Alain
Cc: pyu...@li...
Subject: Re: [Pyunit-interest] Recursive assert_equals.


You may try to convert your dictionaries to strings with "str" or "repr" =
function, and then call assert method on resulting strings. This will =
save you the hassle of implementing recursive assert, but then - in case =
of failure - you'll have top find the guilty field manually.=20

If you are not happy with that approach - you'll have to write a method =
that parses your dictionaries and checks each value with an assert - =
yucks!

BTW, if you are not aware - failed assert INTERRUPTS the test, so that =
if you have more than field with different values - it will throw =
exception on the first one checked.=20

PyUnit is about FrameWork for your tests, that's all; alas, it is not =
about checking complicated data structures.


Hope, it helps

On 11/29/06, Desilets, Alain <Ala...@nr...> wrote:
Is there a way to do a recursive assert_equals on a complex data =
structure?

For example, say I want to assert that two dictionary are "equal". The =
keys of the dictionary are strings, and the values are objects of type =
SomeClass, which, among other things, have an attrigute called =
some_attribute which is of type SomeOtherClass.=20

I want to write:

Self.assert_equal_recusrsive(expected_dict, got_dict)

And have the system do the following:

- Make sure that expected_dict and got_dict are both of the same type (a =
dictionary in this case)=20
- Make sure that they have the same string keys
- For each string key, make sure that the associated objects are of the =
same type (SomeClass), have the same attributes with same values.
- In particular for the some_attribute attribute, it would make sure =
that the values are also of the same type (SomeOtherClass), and that =
they have the same attribute values pairs.=20

Has this been written before? If not would it be doble (it seems to me =
it should be).

I know that in jUnit (Java version), this kind of recursive comparison =
is supported to at least some extend. For example, if I compare two =
dictionnary objects, the system will make sure that the keys are the =
same and the values too. But it doesn't go recursively into the =
attributes of objects AFAIK.=20


----
Alain D=E9silets, MASc
Agent de recherches/Research Officer
Institut de technologie de l'information du CNRC /
NRC Institute for Information Technology

ala...@nr...
T=E9l/Tel (613) 990-2813
Facsimile/t=E9l=E9copieur: (613) 952-7151

Conseil national de recherches Canada, M50, 1200 chemin Montr=E9al,
Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0R6
National Research Council Canada, M50, 1200 Montreal Rd., Ottawa, ON=20
K1A 0R6

Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada



-------------------------------------------------------------------------=

Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net 's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share =
your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge&CID=3D=
DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Pyunit-interest mailing list
Pyu...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pyunit-interest




--=20
Mark Geyzer
Software Engineer,
tel: 972-52-6782603=20

[Pyunit-interest] Fwd: Recursive assert_equals.

[Ori P. <or...@us...>]

Oops, corrected mailing list address.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ori Peleg <or...@us...>
Date: Dec 6, 2006 2:47 AM
Subject: Re: [Pyunit-interest] Recursive assert_equals.
To: "Desilets, Alain" <Ala...@nr...>
Cc: pyu...@li...


Doesn't the equality operator do what you want?
http://docs.python.org/ref/comparisons.html

As long as your classes implement __eq__ or __cmp__, assertEquals
should work fine.
(http://docs.python.org/ref/customization.html)

On 11/29/06, Desilets, Alain <Ala...@nr...> wrote:
> Is there a way to do a recursive assert_equals on a complex data structur=
e?
>
> For example, say I want to assert that two dictionary are "equal". The ke=
ys of the dictionary are strings, and the values are objects of type SomeCl=
ass, which, among other things, have an attrigute called some_attribute whi=
ch is of type SomeOtherClass.
>
> I want to write:
>
> Self.assert_equal_recusrsive(expected_dict, got_dict)
>
> And have the system do the following:
>
> - Make sure that expected_dict and got_dict are both of the same type (a =
dictionary in this case)
> - Make sure that they have the same string keys
> - For each string key, make sure that the associated objects are of the s=
ame type (SomeClass), have the same attributes with same values.
> - In particular for the some_attribute attribute, it would make sure that=
 the values are also of the same type (SomeOtherClass), and that they have =
the same attribute values pairs.
>
> Has this been written before? If not would it be doble (it seems to me it=
 should be).
>
> I know that in jUnit (Java version), this kind of recursive comparison is=
 supported to at least some extend. For example, if I compare two dictionna=
ry objects, the system will make sure that the keys are the same and the va=
lues too. But it doesn't go recursively into the attributes of objects AFAI=
K.
>
>
> ----
> Alain D=E9silets, MASc
> Agent de recherches/Research Officer
> Institut de technologie de l'information du CNRC /
> NRC Institute for Information Technology
>
> ala...@nr...
> T=E9l/Tel (613) 990-2813
> Facsimile/t=E9l=E9copieur: (613) 952-7151
>
> Conseil national de recherches Canada, M50, 1200 chemin Montr=E9al,
> Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0R6
> National Research Council Canada, M50, 1200 Montreal Rd., Ottawa, ON
> K1A 0R6
>
> Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share y=
our
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge&CID=3D=
DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Pyunit-interest mailing list
> Pyu...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pyunit-interest
>

Re: [Pyunit-interest] Recursive assert_equals.

[Mark G. <mar...@gm...>]

You may try to convert your dictionaries to strings with "str" or "repr"
function, and then call assert method on resulting strings. This will save
you the hassle of implementing recursive assert, but then - in case of
failure - you'll have top find the guilty field manually.

If you are not happy with that approach - you'll have to write a method tha=
t
parses your dictionaries and checks each value with an assert - yucks!

BTW, if you are not aware - failed assert INTERRUPTS the test, so that if
you have more than field with different values - it will throw exception on
the first one checked.

PyUnit is about FrameWork for your tests, that's all; alas, it is not about
checking complicated data structures.

Hope, it helps

On 11/29/06, Desilets, Alain <Ala...@nr...> wrote:
>
> Is there a way to do a recursive assert_equals on a complex data
> structure?
>
> For example, say I want to assert that two dictionary are "equal". The
> keys of the dictionary are strings, and the values are objects of type
> SomeClass, which, among other things, have an attrigute called
> some_attribute which is of type SomeOtherClass.
>
> I want to write:
>
> Self.assert_equal_recusrsive(expected_dict, got_dict)
>
> And have the system do the following:
>
> - Make sure that expected_dict and got_dict are both of the same type (a
> dictionary in this case)
> - Make sure that they have the same string keys
> - For each string key, make sure that the associated objects are of the
> same type (SomeClass), have the same attributes with same values.
> - In particular for the some_attribute attribute, it would make sure that
> the values are also of the same type (SomeOtherClass), and that they have
> the same attribute values pairs.
>
> Has this been written before? If not would it be doble (it seems to me it
> should be).
>
> I know that in jUnit (Java version), this kind of recursive comparison is
> supported to at least some extend. For example, if I compare two dictionn=
ary
> objects, the system will make sure that the keys are the same and the val=
ues
> too. But it doesn't go recursively into the attributes of objects AFAIK.
>
>
> ----
> Alain D=E9silets, MASc
> Agent de recherches/Research Officer
> Institut de technologie de l'information du CNRC /
> NRC Institute for Information Technology
>
> ala...@nr...
> T=E9l/Tel (613) 990-2813
> Facsimile/t=E9l=E9copieur: (613) 952-7151
>
> Conseil national de recherches Canada, M50, 1200 chemin Montr=E9al,
> Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0R6
> National Research Council Canada, M50, 1200 Montreal Rd., Ottawa, ON
> K1A 0R6
>
> Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
> your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge&CID=3D=
DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> Pyunit-interest mailing list
> Pyu...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pyunit-interest
>



--=20
Mark Geyzer
Software Engineer,
tel: 972-52-6782603

[Pyunit-interest] Recursive assert_equals.

[Desilets, A. <Ala...@nr...>]

Is there a way to do a recursive assert_equals on a complex data =
structure?=20

For example, say I want to assert that two dictionary are "equal". The =
keys of the dictionary are strings, and the values are objects of type =
SomeClass, which, among other things, have an attrigute called =
some_attribute which is of type SomeOtherClass.

I want to write:

Self.assert_equal_recusrsive(expected_dict, got_dict)

And have the system do the following:

- Make sure that expected_dict and got_dict are both of the same type (a =
dictionary in this case)
- Make sure that they have the same string keys
- For each string key, make sure that the associated objects are of the =
same type (SomeClass), have the same attributes with same values.
- In particular for the some_attribute attribute, it would make sure =
that the values are also of the same type (SomeOtherClass), and that =
they have the same attribute values pairs.

Has this been written before? If not would it be doble (it seems to me =
it should be).

I know that in jUnit (Java version), this kind of recursive comparison =
is supported to at least some extend. For example, if I compare two =
dictionnary objects, the system will make sure that the keys are the =
same and the values too. But it doesn't go recursively into the =
attributes of objects AFAIK.


----
Alain D=E9silets, MASc=20
Agent de recherches/Research Officer=20
Institut de technologie de l'information du CNRC /=20
NRC Institute for Information Technology=20

ala...@nr...=20
T=E9l/Tel (613) 990-2813=20
Facsimile/t=E9l=E9copieur: (613) 952-7151=20

Conseil national de recherches Canada, M50, 1200 chemin Montr=E9al,=20
Ottawa (Ontario) K1A 0R6=20
National Research Council Canada, M50, 1200 Montreal Rd., Ottawa, ON=20
K1A 0R6=20

Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada=20

=20

Re: [Pyunit-interest] ParallelTestSuite from 2001

[Ori P. <or...@us...>]

'--threads' with Testoob does that with unittest suites.

http://testoob.sourceforge.net

Jhon Honce wrote:
> Has anyone updated this for the latest unittest? If I get it running,
> I=92ll post. I=92m new to python and unittest so any help/ideas would b=
e
> appreciated.
>=20
> --Jhon Honce
>=20
>=20
> class ParallelTestSuite(unittest.TestSuite):
>      """Runs its tests in parallel threads"""
>      def __call__(self, testResult):
>          from threading import Thread
>          threads =3D []
>          for test in self._tests:
>              result =3D test.defaultTestResult()
>              thread =3D Thread(target=3Dtest, args=3D(result,))
>              threads.append((test, thread, result))
>              thread.start()
>          for test, thread, result in threads:
>              thread.join()
>              testResult.startTest(test)
>              for error in result.errors:
>                  apply(testResult.addError, error)
>              for failure in result.failures:
>                  apply(testResult.addFailure, failure)
>              testResult.stopTest(test)
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log
> files
> for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
> searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dk&kid=103432&bid#0486&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> Pyunit-interest mailing list
> Pyu...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pyunit-interest
>=20

Re: [Pyunit-interest] Help!

[Steve P. <pu...@us...>]

Hi Peter,

The function 'unittest.main()' is the top-level function that turns a  
python file into a standalone runnable test program.  It uses sys.exit 
() to indicate whether the tests passed or not.

What you see here is the result of running that function inside an  
interactive interpreter, which is intercepting the 'SystemExit' that  
is thrown by sys.exit().  If you don't care about the exit code, you  
can just wrap 'unittest.main()' in a try: except SystemExit: block.

Hope that helps,

-Steve


On 29 May 2006, at 00:04, Peter Olsen wrote:

> I am completely befuddled.
>
>
> I run this program
>
> ----------
>
> def matrixSize(matrix):
>     return (len(matrix),len(matrix[0]))
>
> if __name__  == "__main__":
>
>     import unittest
>
>     print "Unit test code."
>
> #    class MatrixUtilsTest(unittest.TestCase):
> #        def setUp(self):
> #            self.a=[[1,2],[3,4]]
> #            self.b = [[2,4],[6,8]]
> #            self.c = [[3,6],[9,12]]
> #            self.d = [[2,8],[18,32]]
> #            print self.a
>
>     class MatrixSizeTest(unittest.TestCase):
>         def runTest(self):
>             self.a = [[1,2],[3,4]]
>             self.assertEqual(matrixSize(self.a),(2,2))
>
>
> #    class MatrixSumTest(MatrixUtilsTest):
> #        def testSum(self):
> #            self.failUnless(matrixSum(self.a, self.b) == [[3,6], 
> [9,12]],
> #                            "sum incorrect")
>
>
>     t = MatrixSizeTest()
>     print t
>     unittest.main()
>
> ----------
>
> and get this result
>
> ----------
>
> >>> ================================ RESTART  
> ================================
> >>>
> Unit test code.
> runTest (__main__.MatrixSizeTest)
> .
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ran 1 test in 0.024s
>
> OK
>
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "/Users/pcolsen/D.Sources/Nash_Compact_Numerical_Methods/ 
> testTest.py", line 32, in -toplevel-
>     unittest.main()
>   File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.4/lib/ 
> python2.4/unittest.py", line 759, in __init__
>     self.runTests()
>   File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.4/lib/ 
> python2.4/unittest.py", line 797, in runTests
>     sys.exit(not result.wasSuccessful())
> SystemExit: False
> >>>
>
> ----------
>
>  I'm  using MacPython 2.4 running on OS-X
>
> System Version:	Mac OS X 10.4.6 (8I127)
> Kernel Version:	Darwin 8.6.0
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> All the advantages of Linux Managed Hosting--Without the Cost and  
> Risk!
> Fully trained technicians. The highest number of Red Hat  
> certifications in
> the hosting industry. Fanatical Support. Click to learn more
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel? 
> cmd=lnk&kid=107521&bid=248729&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> Pyunit-interest mailing list
> Pyu...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pyunit-interest

[Pyunit-interest] Help!

[Peter O. <pc...@co...>]

I am completely befuddled.


I run this program

----------

def matrixSize(matrix):
     return (len(matrix),len(matrix[0]))

if __name__  == "__main__":

     import unittest

     print "Unit test code."

#    class MatrixUtilsTest(unittest.TestCase):
#        def setUp(self):
#            self.a=[[1,2],[3,4]]
#            self.b = [[2,4],[6,8]]
#            self.c = [[3,6],[9,12]]
#            self.d = [[2,8],[18,32]]
#            print self.a

     class MatrixSizeTest(unittest.TestCase):
         def runTest(self):
             self.a = [[1,2],[3,4]]
             self.assertEqual(matrixSize(self.a),(2,2))


#    class MatrixSumTest(MatrixUtilsTest):
#        def testSum(self):
#            self.failUnless(matrixSum(self.a, self.b) == [[3,6], 
[9,12]],
#                            "sum incorrect")


     t = MatrixSizeTest()
     print t
     unittest.main()

----------

and get this result

----------

 >>> ================================ RESTART  
================================
 >>>
Unit test code.
runTest (__main__.MatrixSizeTest)
.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 1 test in 0.024s

OK

Traceback (most recent call last):
   File "/Users/pcolsen/D.Sources/Nash_Compact_Numerical_Methods/ 
testTest.py", line 32, in -toplevel-
     unittest.main()
   File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.4/lib/ 
python2.4/unittest.py", line 759, in __init__
     self.runTests()
   File "/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.4/lib/ 
python2.4/unittest.py", line 797, in runTests
     sys.exit(not result.wasSuccessful())
SystemExit: False
 >>>

----------

  I'm  using MacPython 2.4 running on OS-X

System Version:	Mac OS X 10.4.6 (8I127)
Kernel Version:	Darwin 8.6.0

[Pyunit-interest] ParallelTestSuite from 2001

[Jhon H. <ho...@ma...>]

Has anyone updated this for the latest unittest? If I get it running, =20=

I=92ll post. I=92m new to python and unittest so any help/ideas would be =
=20
appreciated.

--Jhon Honce


class ParallelTestSuite(unittest.TestSuite):
      """Runs its tests in parallel threads"""
      def __call__(self, testResult):
          from threading import Thread
          threads =3D []
          for test in self._tests:
              result =3D test.defaultTestResult()
              thread =3D Thread(target=3Dtest, args=3D(result,))
              threads.append((test, thread, result))
              thread.start()
          for test, thread, result in threads:
              thread.join()
              testResult.startTest(test)
              for error in result.errors:
                  apply(testResult.addError, error)
              for failure in result.failures:
                  apply(testResult.addFailure, failure)
              testResult.stopTest(test)

[Pyunit-interest] Code Theft: ParallelTestSuite from 2001

[Honce, J. W <jho...@in...>]

Has anyone updated this for the latest unittest? If I get it running,
I'll post. I'm new to python and unittest so any help/ideas would be
appreciated.=20

=20

--Jhon Honce

=20
=20
class ParallelTestSuite(unittest.TestSuite):
     """Runs its tests in parallel threads"""
     def __call__(self, testResult):
         from threading import Thread
         threads =3D []
         for test in self._tests:
             result =3D test.defaultTestResult()
             thread =3D Thread(target=3Dtest, args=3D(result,))
             threads.append((test, thread, result))
             thread.start()
         for test, thread, result in threads:
             thread.join()
             testResult.startTest(test)
             for error in result.errors:
                 apply(testResult.addError, error)
             for failure in result.failures:
                 apply(testResult.addFailure, failure)
             testResult.stopTest(test)

[Pyunit-interest] wxPython pyunit unittest test runner gui

[Tim B. <tb...@bi...>]

I desire a better graphical test runner (than the tkinter
unittestgui.py) to run my unit test cases, which are implemented using
the standard unittest module. I have searched Google and all the
seemingly-relevant newsgroups, and the only reference I found is 5 years
old. Before I reinvent the wheel, I thought I'd post a new request, as
wxPython is my preferred gui framework. Also, I have had problems with
the Tkinter version never updating during test running and would like
better features such as automatic test searching and grouping,
generating results reports, etc.

=20

Thanks,

Tim Black
Biamp Systems
(503)641-7287 ext.153

=20

[Pyunit-interest] Automatically generated tests

[Magnus L. H. <ma...@he...>]

Hi!

I've been using the default test loader, writing several tests in the
same TestCase (using the method naming convention method). This seems
fine for hard-coded tests, but I keep running into the need to
auto-generate tests, by trying out various combinations of parameters,
for example (i.e., having a few loops in my test method). The problem
is that I'd like to run each case (i.e., combination of parameters)
with the same fixture. In other words, I'd like to have a separate
test (with a separate run of setUp/tearDown) for each case -- but
without having to write separate test methods for each of them.

I guess I could have separate code for creating individual TestCase
objects separately and add them to a common suite etc. -- but using
the standard unittest.main() method is quite convenient... :]

What is the "best practice" for automatically generated tests in
PyUnit?

-- 
Magnus Lie Hetland               Time flies like the wind. Fruit flies
http://hetland.org               like bananas.         -- Groucho Marx

Re: [Pyunit-interest] Newbie question

[Steve P. <ste...@ya...>]

Hi Jim,

unittest.main() is designed to turn a test module into an executable test 
script, it explicitly calls 'sys.exit()' to indicate success or otherwise.

You are running the entire script from within the interpreter, and the 
interpreter is reporting to you that sys.exit() has been called, which 
works by raising SystemExit.

In other words, it's nothing to worry about, but it is a nuisance when 
pushing an entire test script through the interpreter, as happens when 
executing a script in emacs' python mode. One way to avoid having the 
traceback printed out is to replace

  unittest.main()

with

  try: unittest.main()
  except SystemExit: pass

Best wishes,

-Steve

--
http://www.pythonconsulting.com/


On Wednesday 08 September 2004 19:42, Frohnhofer, James wrote:
> Is it expected behavior that the text-based test runner print a stack
> traceback upon completion?  For example (from the pyunit documentation):
>
> import unittest
>
> class IntegerArithmenticTestCase(unittest.TestCase):
>     def testAdd(self):  ## test method names begin 'test*'
>         self.assertEquals((1 + 2), 3)
>         self.assertEquals(0 + 1, 1)
>     def testMultiply(self):
>         self.assertEquals((0 * 10), 0)
>         self.assertEquals((5 * 8), 40)
>
> if __name__ == '__main__':
>     unittest.main()
>
>
> When run as a script returns:
>
>
> ..
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ran 2 tests in 0.015s
>
> OK
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "H:/Python23/Lib/testest.py", line 12, in ?
>     unittest.main()
>   File "H:\Python23\lib\unittest.py", line 721, in __init__
>     self.runTests()
>   File "H:\Python23\lib\unittest.py", line 759, in runTests
>     sys.exit(not result.wasSuccessful())
> SystemExit: False
>
>
>
> While I can see the OK and the two dots (..) for success, I would expect
> success not to be followed by a stack trace.  Am I doing something wrong
> or am I being a moron -- a real possibility.  I am familiar with xUnit,
> but fairly new to Python.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim
>
> =========================================================================
>===== This message is for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you
> received this message in error please delete it and notify us. If this
> message was misdirected, CSFB does not waive any confidentiality or
> privilege. CSFB retains and monitors electronic communications sent
> through its network. Instructions transmitted over this system are not
> binding on CSFB until they are confirmed by us. Message transmission is
> not guaranteed to be secure.
> =========================================================================
>=====
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by BEA Weblogic Workshop
> FREE Java Enterprise J2EE developer tools!
> Get your free copy of BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 today.
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5047&alloc_id=10808&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Pyunit-interest mailing list
> Pyu...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pyunit-interest

[Pyunit-interest] Newbie question

[Frohnhofer, J. <jam...@cs...>]

Is it expected behavior that the text-based test runner print a stack
traceback upon completion?  For example (from the pyunit documentation):

import unittest
 
class IntegerArithmenticTestCase(unittest.TestCase):
    def testAdd(self):  ## test method names begin 'test*'
        self.assertEquals((1 + 2), 3)
        self.assertEquals(0 + 1, 1)
    def testMultiply(self):
        self.assertEquals((0 * 10), 0)
        self.assertEquals((5 * 8), 40)

if __name__ == '__main__':
    unittest.main()


When run as a script returns:

>>> 
..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 2 tests in 0.015s

OK
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "H:/Python23/Lib/testest.py", line 12, in ?
    unittest.main()
  File "H:\Python23\lib\unittest.py", line 721, in __init__
    self.runTests()
  File "H:\Python23\lib\unittest.py", line 759, in runTests
    sys.exit(not result.wasSuccessful())
SystemExit: False
>>> 


While I can see the OK and the two dots (..) for success, I would expect
success not to be followed by a stack trace.  Am I doing something wrong or am
I being a moron -- a real possibility.  I am familiar with xUnit, but fairly
new to Python.

Thanks,

Jim

==============================================================================
This message is for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you received
this message in error please delete it and notify us. If this message was
misdirected, CSFB does not waive any confidentiality or privilege. CSFB
retains and monitors electronic communications sent through its network.
Instructions transmitted over this system are not binding on CSFB until they
are confirmed by us. Message transmission is not guaranteed to be secure.
==============================================================================

[Pyunit-interest] TestRunner

[Diener, E. <Edw...@lo...>]

There is hardly any documentation on the TestRunner class in the Python
2.3 docs. What are its member functions and attributes ? How does one
replace the TextTestRunner used by unittest with another one ?

Re: [Pyunit-interest] How to tearDown only after a failed test ?

[Steve P. <ste...@ya...>]

On Saturday 14 August 2004 21:26, Antoine Brenner wrote:
> Hi !
>
> Is there a (or more exactely what is the) way to run some kind of super
> tearDown only after an error or a failure of a test ?
>
> I still need the regular tearDown after each test, but failed ones need
> a special cleanup that is slow and unnecessary when tests run OK.


Hi Antoine,

This is not directly supported, but you can get the effect you want by 
wrapping test methods in an object that calls a clean-up method for you, as 
shown below. It's a bit hacky, and maybe in future it would be a good idea 
to add 'onFail()' hook methods to TestCase. Opinions, anyone?

Best wishes,

-Steve

---------


import unittest

class AddExceptionHook:
    def __init__(self, method, hook_method):
        self.method, self.hook_method = method, hook_method

    def __call__(self):
        try: return self.method()
        except:
            self.hook_method()
            raise


class MyTestCase(unittest.TestCase):

    def tearDown(self):
        print "normal tearDown"

    def test_that_may_fail(self):
        raise Exception("deliberate failure")

    ## Additional tear-down hook
    def on_fail():
        print "Tearing down because we failed"
    classmethod(on_fail)

    ## Add clean-up hooks to relevant methods
    test_that_may_fail = AddExceptionHook(test_that_may_fail, on_fail)

if __name__ == '__main__':
    unittest.main()



-- 
Steve Purcell
http://www.pythonconsulting.com

[Pyunit-interest] How to tearDown only after a failed test ?

[Antoine B. <pyt...@sp...>]

Hi !

Is there a (or more exactely what is the) way to run some kind of super 
tearDown only after an error or a failure of a test ?

I still need the regular tearDown after each test, but failed ones need 
a special cleanup that is slow and unnecessary when tests run OK.

Best regards,
Antoine Brenner

[Pyunit-interest] I'd like to add an __iter__ method to unittest.TestSuite

[Jim F. <ji...@zo...>]

TestSuite objects provide no public mechanism for iteration.
We have a need to be able to iterate over them.  Up to now,
we've been using the _tests attribute, which is bad.

If no one objects, I'll add an __iter__ method.
(I'll do this in the Python CVS repository.)

Jim

-- 
Jim Fulton           mailto:ji...@zo...       Python Powered!
CTO                  (540) 361-1714            http://www.python.org
Zope Corporation     http://www.zope.com       http://www.zope.org