Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Unit Testing’

Unit Testing Framework: EAMSteps

2 September, 2011 1 comment

EAMSteps is a framework that makes Unit Testing easier because of its following principles:
- External data store for test data like excel spreadsheet
- Automated assertions using co-related inputs and outputs
- Minimal lines of code to get started

It all started in 2009, when I decided that in long term I would need to have a framework in place that will help me meet my objectives and I started to look for any existing tools. When I did not find any framework that would help me, I decided that it was time to write one and here after 2 years I have something breathing.

You can read more about this here.

TestNG or JUnit

7 August, 2011 7 comments

For many years now, I have always found myself going back to TestNG whenever it comes to doing Unit Testing with Java Code. Everytime, I picked up TestNG, people have asked me why do I go over to TestNG especially with JUnit is provided by the default development environment like Eclipse or Maven. Continuing the same battle, yesterday I started to look into Spring’s testing support. It is also built on top of JUnit. However, in a few minutes of using the same, I was searching for a feature in JUnit that I have always found missing. TestNG provides Parameterized Testing using DataProviders. Given that I was once again asking myself a familiar question – TestNG or JUnit, I decided to document this so that next time I am sure which one and why.

Essentially the same

If you are just going to do some basic Unit Testing, both the frameworks are basically the same. Both the frameworks allow you to test the code in a quick and effective manner. They have had tool support in Eclipse and other IDE. They have also had support in the build frameworks like Ant and Maven. For starters JUnit has always been the choice because it was the first framework for Unit Testing and has always been available. Many people I talk about have not heard about TestNG till we talk about it.

Flexibility

Let us look at a very simple test case for each of the two.

package com.kapil.itrader;
import java.util.Arrays;
import java.util.List;
import junit.framework.Assert;
import org.junit.BeforeClass;
import org.junit.Test;

public class FibonacciTest
{
    private Integer input;
    private Integer expected;

    @BeforeClass
    public static void beforeClass()
    {
        // do some initialization
    }

    @Test
    public void FibonacciTest()
    {
        System.out.println("Input: " + input + ". Expected: " + expected);
        Assert.assertEquals(expected, Fibonacci.compute(input));
        assertEquals(expected, Fibonacci.compute(input));
    }
}

Well, this is example showcases I am using a version 4.x+ and am making use of annotations. Priori to release 4.0; JUnit did not support annotations and that was a major advantage that TestNG had over its competitor; but JUnit had quickly adapted. You can notice that JUnit also supports static imports and we can do away with more cumbersome code as in previous versions.

package com.kapil.framework.core;
import junit.framework.Assert;
import org.springframework.context.support.ClassPathXmlApplicationContext;
import org.testng.annotations.BeforeSuite;
import org.testng.annotations.Test;

public class BaseTestCase
{
    protected static final ClassPathXmlApplicationContext context;

    static
    {
        context = new ClassPathXmlApplicationContext("rootTestContext.xml");
        context.registerShutdownHook();
    }

    @BeforeSuite
    private void beforeSetup()
    {
       // Do initialization
    }

    @Test
    public void testTrue()
    {
        Assert.assertTrue(false);
    }
}

A first look at the two code, would infer that both are pretty much the same. However, for those who have done enough unit testing, will agree with me that TestNG allows for more flexibility. JUnit requires me to declare my initialization method as static; and consequently anything that I will write in that method has to be static too. JUnit also requires me to have my initialization method as public; but TestNG does not. I can use best practices from OOP in my testing classes as well. TestNG also allows me to declare Test Suite, Groups, Methods and use annotations like @BeforeSuite, @BeforeMethod, @BeforeGroups in addition to @BeforeClass. This is very helpful when it comes to writing any level of integration testing or unit test cases that need to access common data sets.

Test Isolations and Dependency Testing

Junit is very effective when it comes to testing in isolation. It essentially means that there is you can not control the order of execution of tests. And, hence if you have two tests that you want to run in a specific order because of any kind of dependency, you can not do that using JUnit. However, TestNG allows you to do this very effectively. In Junit you can make workaround this problem, but it is not neat and that easy.

Parameter based Testing

A very powerful feature that TestNG offers is “Parameterized Testing”. JUnit has added some support for this in 4.5+ versions, but it is not as effective as TestNG. You may have worked with FIT you would know what I am talking about. However, the support added in JUnit is very basic and not that effective. I have modified my previous test case to include parameterized testing.

package com.kapil.itrader;

import static org.junit.Assert.assertEquals;

import java.util.Arrays;
import java.util.List;

import junit.framework.Assert;

import org.junit.BeforeClass;
import org.junit.Test;
import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
import org.junit.runners.Parameterized;
import org.junit.runners.Parameterized.Parameters;

@RunWith(Parameterized.class)
public class FibonacciTest
{
    private Integer input;
    private Integer expected;

    @Parameters
    public static List data()
    {
        return Arrays.asList(new Integer[][] { { 0, 0 }, { 1, 1 }, { 2, 1 }, { 3, 2 }, { 4, 3 }, { 5, 5 }, { 6, 8 } });
    }

    @BeforeClass
    public static void beforeClass()
    {
        System.out.println("Before");
    }

    public FibonacciTest(Integer input, Integer expected)
    {
        this.input = input;
        this.expected = expected;
    }

    @Test
    public void FibonacciTest()
    {
        System.out.println("Input: " + input + ". Expected: " + expected);
        Assert.assertEquals(expected, Fibonacci.compute(input));
        assertEquals(expected, Fibonacci.compute(input));
    }

}

You will notice that I have used @RunWith annotation to allow my test case to be parameterized. In this case, the inline method – data() which has been annotated with @Parameters will be used to provide data to the class. However, the biggest issue is that the data is passed to class constructor. This allows me to code only logically bound test cases in this class. And, I will end up having multiple test cases for one service because all the various methods in the Service wil require different data sets. The good thing is that there are various open source frameworks which have extended this approach and added their own “RunWith” implementations to allow integration with external entities like CSV, HTML or Excel files.

TestNG provides this support out of the box. Not support for reading from CSV or external files, but from Data Providers.

package com.kapil.itrader.core.managers.admin;

import org.testng.Assert;
import org.testng.annotations.Test;

import com.uhc.simple.common.BaseTestCase;
import com.uhc.simple.core.admin.manager.ILookupManager;
import com.uhc.simple.core.admin.service.ILookupService;
import com.uhc.simple.dataprovider.admin.LookupValueDataProvider;
import com.uhc.simple.dto.admin.LookupValueRequest;
import com.uhc.simple.dto.admin.LookupValueResponse;

/**
 * Test cases to test {@link ILookupService}.
 */
public class LookupServiceTests extends BaseTestCase
{

    @Test(dataProvider = "LookupValueProvider", dataProviderClass = LookupValueDataProvider.class)
    public void testGetAllLookupValues(String row, LookupValueRequest request, LookupValueResponse expectedResponse)
    {
        ILookupManager manager = super.getLookupManager();
        LookupValueResponse actualResponse = manager.getLookupValues(request);
        Assert.assertEquals(actualResponse.getStatus(), expectedResponse.getStatus());
    }
}

The code snippet above showcases that I have used dataProvider as a value to the annotations and then I have provided a class which is responsible for creating the data that is supplied to the method at the time of invocation. Using this mechanism, I can easily write test cases and its data providers in a de-coupled fashion and use it very effectively.

Why I choose TestNG

For me the Parameterized Testing is the biggest reason why I choose TestNG over Junit. However, everything that I have listed above is the reason why I always want to spend a few minutes in setting up TestNG in a new Eclipse setup or maven project. TestNG is very useful when it comes to running big test suites. For a small project or a training exercise JUnit is fine; because anyone can start with it very quickly; but not for projects where we need 1000s of test cases and in most of those test cases you will have various scenarios to cover.

http://kapilvirenahuja.com/tech/2011/08/07/testng-or-junit/

Who the hell needs Quality?

10 March, 2011 2 comments

I Do; you do; our customers do; Period

Well we all know the answer, but is it really what we believe in? The more important question is how do we choose to deliver quality when we can not measure it?

A few months back, I was sitting in a meeting where the conversation went something like

Business Person: So we need 24000 hours to deliver the scope of the release?

IT Person: Yes. But this does not include the hours needed to fix defects that we will have in the application at the end of development lifecycle.

Business Person: So how many defects we had in last release – I assume about 700?

IT Person: Yeah.

Business Person: So I can expect 2000 in this release? How much time do you need to fix one defect?

IT Person: About 16 hours per defect

I will let you do the math, but what made me fell out of my chair was the fact that everyone in the room was accepting the fact that even before we were developing the application we would have 66% of the time spent in fixing defects. Not even once did anyone asked, how can we ensure that we do not have so many defects in the application. Now even once did anyone asked if we already have Unit testing how come we still have these many number of defects.

Well, this is not the first time I heard this conversation and I am sure not the last time. But, I wonder how do people reach Architects, Project Managers, Program Managers and Directors IT if they have these discussions.

I did not say anything in the meeting, because I was supposed to sit there and listen which is another sad story. I could not even say anything to my IT team once the meeting was over; I was just not supposed to. Maybe, if someone who was in that meeting reads this and can co-relate I would be in a big shit of trouble; but I am going to risk it – do not know why.

I am someone who can not start writing a piece of code without having a unit test before it (Test Driven Development). But, then the projects I have been working lately do not even automated unit testing let along TDD. Their unit testing is done because they have to compliant with the Quality Process and at times it is done with a set of people who never coded it. The unit testing team works like a QA team but is withing the realms of the development team itself. And then there are times when Unit testing happens in parallel to System Testing.

This is a rant, where I hope I can pass a message around importance of testing.

 

Dilbert - Quality

Dilbert - Quality

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Related Articles

Why do I Test?

16 April, 2008 2 comments

Most of you who would read this would have done some level of testing in their programming career. Many of you would appreciate the fact that unit testing exists in the world.

Analogy that works for me is that in real life, I test all the time. I test so much that it has become a habit so much so, that I now do not even realize that I am testing. If I think about it, I can site many examples. The reason I test so often is because I want to be sure that things will work when I need them to.

When I became a programmer, I found myself doing that same just out of habit of testing everything. Since I started to code, I have come across may programmers who have reasons not to test and they resist testing al their life. Once they find themselves in a the arena of no testing, they enjoy and as per them are most productive. As for me, there have been times, when I have not tested myself, and I have been productive as well, but I have always found that the applications that I design/code with writing tests end up being prototypes.

I see many benefits of testing, and thats the reason when I start a project, I make sure that the first thing that is done is to setup an integrated unit testing tool for me to write my tests. In other words, without unit tests, I do not trust my own code and I would not even go into changing it – I can never know after a few changes if I broke something. Unit tests act as an umbrella that saves you from a downpour for defects in the application.

Passing my code along to a new developer has been a challenge. Ever tried giving a new programmer a code walk through. I tried test walk through and it has been a wonderful experience. They understood the code once and were able to start coding faster. I like to call my tests as API documentation for my code.

I have been unit testing in projects for last 3.5 years now and always I have found in a later stage how valuable those tests were. Coming to Flex, I started to find similar options and Flex Cover was the answer. Simple to get started and now very soon I would have my testing suite for Flex as well.

Eager to hear what your experience have been.

Categories: Beginner, Quality Tags: ,
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.