I am fairly new to Java so forgive me if this is a silly question, but believe me when I say I really cannot find a solid answer.
This is what I'm working with:
So I'm testing a program, and the easiest way to keep it maintained and updated is to create my own library of "buttons". Everything in the library are small functions like "enterValidCredentials" and "clickLoginButton".
So let's take a look at my test cases. In a perfect world I'd be able to just:
public class progressCheck {
public static void main(String[] args) {
WebDriver driver = new FirefoxDriver();
driver.get("http://mail.google.com/");
enterValidCredentials;
clickLoginButton;
}
}
enterValidCredentials and clickLoginButton exist in my library of classes. I know very well that that's not going to work as written above. What, literally, is the correct way to do this?
If it helps at all, my enterValidCredentials class looks like this:
public class loginPageButtons {
private WebDriver driver;
Actions actions = new Actions(driver);
public class enterValidCredentials { // This class enters in a valid username and valid password on the login page.
public void enterValidCredentials2() {
driver.findElement(By.cssSelector("input[type=\"text\"]")).clear();
driver.findElement(By.cssSelector("input[type=\"text\"]")).sendKeys("XXXXXXXX");
driver.findElement(By.cssSelector("input[type=\"password\"]")).clear();
driver.findElement(By.cssSelector("input[type=\"password\"]")).sendKeys("XXXXXXXX");
}
}
All my other functions follow a relatively similar structure (depending on their function, of course).
You can use a unit test to check single functionalities of your classes.
The most used library to create unit tests is JUnit.
If you use an ide (like IntelliJ or Eclipse) running the test can be done with a simple command exactly as running a main method.
If you need to create mocks of your objects you can use a library like Mockito (but there are many other valid alternatives).
Note: A mock is an object that has the same interface as a complex object that is difficult to use in a test environment (for example a db connection, a file handler, a network handler).
Here is an example, I tried to imagine your code and a possible test. I assumed that clickLoginButton returns an integer just to show a possible assert statement.
Example:
#Test
public static void testCredentials() {
WebDriver driver = new FirefoxDriver();
driver.get("http://mail.google.com/");
EnterValidCredentials enterValidCredentials = new EnterValidCredentials(); // Or create a mock if necessary
// Set values if necessary
int returnValue = enterValidCredentials.clickLoginButton();
assertEquals(returnValue, 1);
}
Related
I am trying to setup TestNG so that it gives me new instances of my class variable for each test (basically like JUnit). I need this as I intend to parallelize my tests at the method level. I have been experimenting with both standalone Guice and the built in Guice functionality that TestNG provides to try to accomplish this but I have had no luck. I know that I can use ThreadLocal, but calling .get() for every variable in the test is pretty unappealing. I am weary of using GuiceBerry as it does not really have a lot of updates/activity and it's last release is not even acquirable via Maven. I am pretty set on TestNG as for all the inconvenience this is causing me it still does a lot of great things. I am open to things other tools though to accomplish my goal. Basically I want things setup so the below tests would work consistently. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
// just has a variable thats a class called child with a simple string variable
// with a value of "original
Parent p;
#Test
public void sometest1(){
p.child.value = "Altered";
Assert.assertTrue(p.child.value.equals("Altered"));
}
#Test
public void sometest2(){
Assert.assertTrue(p.child.value.equals("original"));
}
TestNG doesn't create a new instance for each test. If you want such a behavior than I recommend creating separate test classes. e.g.:
public class SomeTest1 {
Parent p;
#Test
public void something(){
p.child.value = "Altered";
Assert.assertTrue(p.child.value.equals("Altered"));
}
}
public class SomeTest2 {
Parent p;
#Test
public void something(){
Assert.assertTrue(p.child.value.equals("original"));
}
}
Note that TestNG can run JUnit 3 and JUnit 4 tests (you might maintain a mixed suite depending on the style you want to use in a given test class).
I've implemented a feature in my jUnit tests that takes, for every test case, a fresh copy of a data source. This copy is taken in a folder specific for each test case. The idea is that every test case can start from a clean situation, manipulate it and let it as such after the run. This is often useful when the test fails for analysing the problem.
For now I have to call this feature directly in the test method because I don't know how to retrieve the current test name:
public void testTest1() {
TestHelper th=TestHelper.create("testTest1",subPathToDataSource);
// do the test...
Path dataPath = th.getDataPath();
...
}
I would like to be able to write something like this:
Path dataPath;
#Before
public initTest() {
th=TestHelper.create(SomeJUnitObject.getCurrentTestName(),subPathToDataSource);
...
}
public void testTest1() {
// do the test...
Path dataPath = th.getDataPath();
...
}
Until now I found as answers : "You don't need to know that"... But I do need it !
Is this possible ?
Kind regards
Look at the TestName rule.
You should be able to add in your test class:
#Rule TestName name=new TestName();
And then access it.
(On phone, so can't check versions support/details - might be 4.x only)
Here is an alternative approach; create an abstract class which your "real" test classes inherit.
I have several such examples in my projects and here I will give one, mainly testing for individual JSON Patch operations.
All my test files are JSON, and located under an appropriately named resource directory. The base, abstract class is JsonPatchOperationTest. And here is the full code of AddOperationTest which tests for JSON Patch's add operation:
public final class AddOperationTest
extends JsonPatchOperationTest
{
public AddOperationTest()
throws IOException
{
super("add");
}
}
And that's it! Not even one test method in this class, but of course your implementation may vary.
In your case you probably want to pass the directory name as a constructor argument, or the like.
I am fairly new to the JAVA world - coming from a ColdFusion background - and have been learning Java because I'm learning Selenium WebDriver /JUnit. I have written several test classes that test admin functionality that follow a similar structure.
public class myclass{
public static WebDriver driver;
#BeforeClass
public static void startDriver(){
driver = new FirefoxDriver();
driver.get("some url");
}
#Test
public void myLogin(){
some login code
}
#Test
public void somefunction() {
other admin function to test
}
My question is this - since all my tests require the user to log in - I end up having to re-use the "mylogin" test code over and over. How can I write the tests to simply "include" (like the "cfinclude" tag in ColdFusion) the login code so that if changes are made to the login page functionality - I only have to change it in one place.
Java hasn't got a lexical include statement like ColdFusion or C. This is by design, because just pasting sourcecode before compilation is a very unclean way of sharing code between modules.
But there are many other ways to approach this issue. Here are two:
Create your own library with commonly used functionality encapsulated in methods and use this library in your tests
Add setUp and tearDown methods for your test classes. These methods are executed before and after each one of your test methods. Note that test classes can inherit from each other. So when you have lots of test classes with identical setUp and tearDown methods, you can make them extend a common base class and implement these methods in the base class once.
You can implement the myLogin() functionality in a base parent class what you will need to extend in all of your test classes to access this functionality across various tests:
public abstract class MyBaseTest {
public void myLogin() {
<some login code>
}
}
public class MyClass extends MyBaseTest {
#Test
public void somefunction() {
super.myLogin();
}
}
You could use the #Before annotation to accomplish this. The annotated method will run before every #Test annotated method. Similarly you could use #After to logout after every unit test, if needed.
I am exploring the use of Selenium 2 on a web application which requires authentication before a user can use any of the application. I am planning on either JUnit 4 or TestNG (Still investigating which one to use with Grid 2). I may plan to use jbehave as well.
Does anyone have any suggestions on how I can improve the following test so I can use successful login functionality across all my tests? I want to avoid duplicating login in the tests itself.
public class LoginPageTest {
private LoginPage page;
#Before
public void openTheBrowser() {
page = PageFactory.initElements(new FirefoxDriver(), LoginPage.class);
page.open("http://www.site.com/Login");
}
#After
public void closeTheBrowser() {
page.close();
}
#Test
public void whenTheUserEntersValidCredentialsTheUserIsLoggedIn() {
assertThat(page.getTitle(), containsString("Login") );
}
}
The test is simplified but it will return a page object of a successful login.
thanks
check case study # http://blog.infostretch.com/?p=806 for better idea. If you are at initial level of development i would suggest you to try using QAF (formerly ISFW).
Your best option might be to use the LoginPageTest class as a parent class and extend each of your test classes from LoginPageTest.
That way, each test can login to the system using the parent's setup and tear down methods and do its own additional testing as well.
Create Libraries and call the sequence of test cases to execute one test case/scenario.
Eg:
lib.login();
lib.whenTheUserEntersValidCredentialsTheUserIsLoggedIn();
lib.logout();
for doing this take care of object creations. solution for object is use of super eg: super.login()
I've got some code I'm deploying to Google App Engine - Java (GAE/J) that makes use of the URLFetchService. I'd like to use JUnit to test this code. Per the testing documentation, it appears I should have a test that uses their LocalURLFetchServiceTestConfig class ROUGHLY as follows:
public class MyRemoteServiceTests {
private static final LocalURLFetchServiceTestConfig urlConfig = new LocalURLFetchServiceTestConfig();
private static final LocalServiceTestHelper helper =
new LocalServiceTestHelper(urlConfig);
#Before
public void setUp() throws Exception {
service = new SampleService();
helper.setUp();
}
#After
public void tearDown() throws Exception {
service = null;
helper.tearDown();
}
#Test
public void testThatCallsCodeThatUsesUrlFetch() {
Object data = service.getRemoteDataUsingUrlFetch("foo", "bar");
Assert.assertNotNull(data);
}
}
I'm finding that this test continues to fail despite using the "helper" as suggested in the GAE/J documentation on testing: "The API package 'urlfetch' or call 'Fetch()' was not found.".
I was assuming that using the "helper" would somehow setup the GAE environment such that when I call URLFetchServiceFactory.getURLFetchService() from within my getRemoteDataUsingUrlFetch method, the interface returned would be an instance of LocalURLFetchService that would just "work" but that seems NOT to be the case.
How can I test this code?
Am I missing something? (I'm pretty new to GAE...)
Do I have to refactor my getRemoteDataUsingUrlFetch so that it doesn't use URLFetchServiceFactory.getURLFetchService() because that makes it untestable locally??? (That sounds like it would really suck...)
Any help/suggestions much appreciated!
Actually, it turns out my problem was failure to include two additional jars that ARE mentioned on the Local Unit Testing page of the documentation. RTM FTW!
appengine-local-runtime.jar
appengine-api-stubs.jar
afaik, the LocalURLFetchService doesn't configure the GAE like you expect. It is more of a way to fetch URL from the local dev and then process the contents however. (Similarly even the LocalDatastoreService and LocalMemcacheService operate on isolated spaces within the test environment)
One way to test your code is to refactor the getRemoteDataUsingUrlFetch() to take maybe the contents of the Url response. somewhat like,
URLFetchResponse resp = LocalURLFetchService.fetch(status, request)
getRemoteDataUsingUrlFetch(foo, bar, resp)