I am aware of the _bootstrap.php file that's used to set up the testing enviroment, etc., but I'm looking for a way to run some code after the entire test suite has finished.
Note that I'm not looking for a way to run code after a single class, i.e. something like _after, but after all classes.
Is there a way to achieve this?
Actually managed to solve this myself, here's how, if anyone is interested.
I created a new helper class inside _support.
<?php
class DataHelper extends \Codeception\Module
{
public function _beforeSuite()
{
// Set up before test suite
}
public function _afterSuite()
{
// Tear down after test suite
}
}
You can then enable this as a module in any suite configuration (the .yml files), like this:
modules:
enabled:
- DataHelper
#Sacha's solution is specially useful if you want to share the same methods accross all suites.
If you're looking for a way to define the methods for a specific suite (or if you want a different method per suite), you can define those methods directly in the suite Helper class.
For instance, if you want to define a _afterSuite method for the Acceptance Suite, just go to support/AcceptanceHelper.php and define those methods there. Eg:
<?php
namespace Codeception\Module;
// here you can define custom actions
// all public methods declared in helper class will be available in $I
class AcceptanceHelper extends \Codeception\Module
{
public function _afterSuite() {
die('everything done');
}
}
Related
I have a function that exists within a controller.
I want to that the logic is sound by writing a small unit test with assertions to match correctly with the output of the function.
I've created a new unit folder to house all the little unit tests for the controller. The correct term may be a functional test?
This is the current set up I have to house all of the assertions for the function. My question is, out of all the functions that exist in this external controller, how can I bring that function in and perform a test on the logic within it?
<?php
namespace Acme\SimplewanBundle\Tests\Unit;
use Doctrine\ORM\Tools\SchemaTool;
class ConfigControllerUnitTest extends \PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase {
public function testValidIpRange() {
}
}
First, the method should probably be moved to a service independent from the controller. In any case, without doing that change, you can already test the controller class as any other PHP class:
namespace Acme\SimplewanBundle\Tests\Unit;
use Doctrine\ORM\Tools\SchemaTool;
class ConfigControllerUnitTest extends \PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase {
public function testValidIpRange()
{
$controller = new \AppBundle\Controller\ConfigController();
$this->assertTrue($controller->isValidIpRange(...));
}
}
I've just started using PHPUnit. Before this, I've used RSpec and Cucumber and their isolated environment where really nice.
I've done my first phpunit test and created 2 mock class, wondering if they will remain in my next test and, as I presumed, they will.
Now, I'm thinking of using a really specific namespace for all this helpers, something like this:
<?php
namespace Subject;
class FirstDependency { /* ... */ }
class TestableSubject extends \Subject { /* ... */ }
class SubjectTest extends \PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase {
/* tests */
}
Is there any better solution to avoid namespace cluttering?
I take the opportunity for another question: which is faster between a method call and a dynamic class instantiation ($s = 'MyClass'; $c = new $s;)?
Actually when I've a dependencies I just put it on a method, such us new_something() and then test a child class TestableSubject with that method overridden.
Again, any better way to do this?
I am using PHPUnit and Selenium to test my web application.
At the moment I have 2 test classes - UserTest and PermissionsTest.
In UserTest I have methods which test that the program can successfully create a new user.
In PermissionsTest I turn certain permissions on and off and test the outcome.
For instance, I might turn the 'Create User' permission off and then test that the 'Create User' button is disabled. However, if I turn the 'Create User' permission back on, I want to test that it is possible to create a user.
All of the logic for being able to create a user is already in the UserTest class - so is there any way of running tests from the UserTest class from the PermissionsTest class?
At the moment I am trying the following code:
public function testUserPermission(){
$userTest = new UserTest();
if($this->hasPermission = true){
$userTest->testCanCreateUser();
}
}
However when I run this test, I get the error "There is currently no active session to execute the 'execute' command. You're probably trying to set some option in setup() with an incorrect setter name..."
Thanks!
It sounds to me like you're missing separation of your test implementation with its logic - I'm not talking about PHP issue but general test model.It will allow you to reuse your test components in various test cases.
You can take a look on some
material about Page Objects in PHP here or general selenium wiki.
The solution was as follows:
//instantiate and set up other test class
$userTest = new UserTest();
$userTest->setUpSessionStrategy($this::$browsers[0]);
$userTest->prepareSession();
//carry out a test from this class
$userTest->testCanCreateUser();
This works nicely. I can't see why using functionality from another test class is a bad idea in this case, because if I didn't do that I'd have to just rewrite that functionality into my new class, which seems less 'pure'...
For Selenium 1 (RC),
I made the following modifications instead (as well as applying the Page Object design pattern):
Specific Test class
//instantiate and set up other test class
$userTest = new UserTest($this->getSessionId());
//carry out a test from this class
$userTest->createUser();
//asserts as normal
$userTest->assertTextPresent();
...
Base Page Object class
class PageObject extends PHPUnit_Extensions_SeleniumTestCase {
public function __construct($session_id) {
parent::__construct();
$this->setSessionId($session_id);
$this->setBrowserUrl(BASE_URL);
}
}
Specific Page Object class
class UserTest extends PageObject {
public function createUser() {
// Page action
}
}
I'm trying to get Mockery to assert that a given method is called at least once.
My test class is:
use \Mockery as m;
class MyTest extends \PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase
{
public function testSetUriIsCalled()
{
$uri = 'http://localhost';
$httpClient = m::mock('Zend\Http\Client');
$httpClient->shouldReceive('setUri')->with($uri)->atLeast()->once();
}
}
As you can see, there's one test that (hopefully) creates an expectation that setUri will be called. Since there isn't any other code involved, I can't imagine that it could be called and yet my test passes. Can anyone explain why?
You need to call Mockery:close() to run verifications for your expectations. It also handles the cleanup of the mockery container for the next testcase.
public function tearDown()
{
parent::tearDown();
m::close();
}
To avoid having to call the close method in every test class, you can just add the TestListener to your phpunit config like so:
<listeners>
<listener class="\Mockery\Adapter\Phpunit\TestListener"></listener>
</listeners>
This approach is explained in the docs.
One thing to note from the linked docs is:
Make sure Composer’s or Mockery’s autoloader is present in the bootstrap file or you will need to also define a “file” attribute pointing to the file of the above TestListener class.
Just a sidenote: If you use Laravel: the make:test --unit generates a test class that extends the original PhpUnit Testcase class and not the included Tests\Testcase, which loads the laravel app and runs the Mockery::close(). It is also the reason why in some cases your tests fail if you use Laravel specific code (like Cache, DB or Storage) in the units you're testing.
so if you need to test units with Laravel specific code, just swap out the 'extends Testcase' and there is no need to call Mockery::close() manually
In my CI system\libraries directory I have a new class named DD_Controller.php. This file looks like this:
<?php if ( ! defined('BASEPATH')) exit('No direct script access allowed');
class DD_Controller extends Controller
{
protected $ddauthentication;
function __construct()
{
parent::Controller();
$this->ddauthentication = "Authenticated";
}
}
?>
My application controller is defined like this:
class Inquiry extends DD_Controller
{...}
The Inquiry class works fine when I extend Controller, but I get a
Fatal error: Class 'DD_Controller' not
found in
C:\development\localhost\applications\inquiry\controllers\inquiry.php
on line 4
When I extend DD_Controller. In the config file I have the prefix defined as such:
$config['subclass_prefix'] = 'DD_';
Any idea of what I'm missing?
TIA
This is a better approach. Do the following:
Go to the following directory: your_ci_app/application/core/ and create a php file called MY_Controller.php (this file will be where your top parent classes will reside)
Open this the file you just created and add your multiple classes, like so:
class Admin_Parent extends CI_Controller {
public function __construct() {
parent::__construct();
}
public function test() {
var_dump("from Admin_Parent");
}
}
class User_Parent extends CI_Controller {
public function __construct() {
parent::__construct();
}
public function test(){
var_dump("from User_Parent");
}
}
Create your children controllers under this directory your_ci_app/application/controllers/ . I will call it adminchild.php
Open adminchild.php and create your controller code, make sure to extend the name of the parent class, like so:
class Adminchild extends Admin_Parent {
function __construct() {
parent::__construct();
}
function test() {
parent::test();
}
}
DD_Controller.php should be in /system/application/libraries/
If you're using the same CI for multiple apps, and you want them all to be able to extends their controllers to your custom one then you can extend the base Controller class in the same file.
In system/libraries/Controller.php below the Controller class:
class Mega_Controller extends Controller {
function Mega_Controller()
{
parent::Controller();
// anything you want to do in every controller, ye shall perform here.
}
}
Then you'll be able to do this in your app controllers:
class Home extends Mega_Controller {
....
Since the extended controller class you created will be available. I think this is better then overwriting the base controller, but that would work as well.
I recommend to avoid "cracking" CodeIgniter core files.
Better use its native extending possibilities and try to fit into them.
The same rule I would recommend for any PHP library / CMS.
This rule has few reasons:
- ability to quiclky upgrade without takint into account thousands of notes where and how was cracked in core files;
- portability;
- possibility to share your code - eg, this will be usable by both you and your friends in case of need, and it will help them to keep their library up to date, the same as you.
In other words, this is much more professional and it pays to you in the future by usability, portability and by update application possibility.
Regarding your personal question...
As for me, there is nothing bad to create your own library with everything you need to extend native CodeIgniter Controller, then load this library in Controller's constructor and you are done. The only thing to make better usability is to give short name to your library.
This way you can even divide what you need in different pieces and put into separate libraries:
WebFeatures
AdminFeatures
etc.
Then you just load needed libraries in your controller's constructor and you are done.
P.S. I know that proposed way does not fit into "right" OOP concept, but in the same time you must never forget about the integrity of the libraries used.
Everything above is just one more view of mine 7-years experience in professional web development, so I hope it will be helpful if not to follow, then at least to take into account.
Regards,
Anton