WebSVN – lars-tiefland.prado – /tests/test_tools/simpletest/docs/en/expectation_documentation.html

<html>
<head>
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<title>
        Extending the SimpleTest unit tester with additional expectation classes
    </title>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="docs.css" title="Styles">
</head>
<body>
<div class="menu_back">
<div class="menu">
<h2>
<a href="index.html">SimpleTest</a>
</h2>
<ul>
<li>
<a href="overview.html">Overview</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="unit_test_documentation.html">Unit tester</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="group_test_documentation.html">Group tests</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="mock_objects_documentation.html">Mock objects</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="partial_mocks_documentation.html">Partial mocks</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="reporter_documentation.html">Reporting</a>
</li>
<li>
<span class="chosen">Expectations</span>
</li>
<li>
<a href="web_tester_documentation.html">Web tester</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="form_testing_documentation.html">Testing forms</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="authentication_documentation.html">Authentication</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="browser_documentation.html">Scriptable browser</a>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
<h1>Expectation documentation</h1>
<div class="content">
        <p>
<a class="target" name="mock">
<h2>More control over mock objects</h2>
</a>
</p>
            <p>
                The default behaviour of the
                <a href="mock_objects_documentation.html">mock objects</a>
                in
                <a href="http://sourceforge.net/projects/simpletest/">SimpleTest</a>
                is either an identical match on the argument or to allow any argument at all.
                For almost all tests this is sufficient.
                Sometimes, though, you want to weaken a test case.
            </p>
            <p>
                One place where a test can be too tightly coupled is with
                text matching.
                Suppose we have a component that outputs a helpful error
                message when something goes wrong.
                You want to test that the correct error was sent, but the actual
                text may be rather long.
                If you test for the text exactly, then every time the exact wording
                of the message changes, you will have to go back and edit the test suite.
            </p>
            <p>
                For example, suppose we have a news service that has failed
                to connect to its remote source.
<pre>
<strong>class NewsService {
    ...
    function publish(&amp;$writer) {
        if (! $this-&gt;isConnected()) {
            $writer-&gt;write('Cannot connect to news service "' .
                    $this-&gt;_name . '" at this time. ' .
                    'Please try again later.');
        }
        ...
    }
}</strong>
</pre>
                Here it is sending its content to a
                <span class="new_code">Writer</span> class.
                We could test this behaviour with a
                <span class="new_code">MockWriter</span> like so...
<pre>
class TestOfNewsService extends UnitTestCase {
    ...
    function testConnectionFailure() {&lt;strong&gt;
        $writer = &amp;new MockWriter();
        $writer-&gt;expectOnce('write', array(
                'Cannot connect to news service ' .
                '"BBC News" at this time. ' .
                'Please try again later.'));
        
        $service = &amp;new NewsService('BBC News');
        $service-&gt;publish($writer);
    }
}
</pre>
                This is a good example of a brittle test.
                If we decide to add additional instructions, such as
                suggesting an alternative news source, we will break
                our tests even though no underlying functionality
                has been altered.
            </p>
            <p>
                To get around this, we would like to do a regular expression
                test rather than an exact match.
                We can actually do this with...
<pre>
class TestOfNewsService extends UnitTestCase {
    ...
    function testConnectionFailure() {
        $writer = &amp;new MockWriter();<strong>
        $writer-&gt;expectOnce(
                'write',
                array(new PatternExpectation('/cannot connect/i')));</strong>
        
        $service = &amp;new NewsService('BBC News');
        $service-&gt;publish($writer);
    }
}
</pre>
                Instead of passing in the expected parameter to the
                <span class="new_code">MockWriter</span> we pass an
                expectation class called
                <span class="new_code">WantedPatternExpectation</span>.
                The mock object is smart enough to recognise this as special
                and to treat it differently.
                Rather than simply comparing the incoming argument to this
                object, it uses the expectation object itself to
                perform the test.
            </p>
            <p>
                The <span class="new_code">WantedPatternExpectation</span> takes
                the regular expression to match in its constructor.
                Whenever a comparison is made by the <span class="new_code">MockWriter</span>
                against this expectation class, it will do a
                <span class="new_code">preg_match()</span> with this pattern.
                With our test case above, as long as "cannot connect"
                appears in the text of the string, the mock will issue a pass
                to the unit tester.
                The rest of the text does not matter.
            </p>
            <p>
                The possible expectation classes are...
                <table>
<tbody>
                    <tr>
<td><span class="new_code">EqualExpectation</span></td><td>An equality, rather than the stronger identity comparison</td>
</tr>
                    <tr>
<td><span class="new_code">NotEqualExpectation</span></td><td>An inequality comparison</td>
</tr>
                    <tr>
<td><span class="new_code">IndenticalExpectation</span></td><td>The default mock object check which must match exactly</td>
</tr>
                    <tr>
<td><span class="new_code">NotIndenticalExpectation</span></td><td>Inverts the mock object logic</td>
</tr>
                    <tr>
<td><span class="new_code">PatternExpectation</span></td><td>Uses a Perl Regex to match a string</td>
</tr>
                    <tr>
<td><span class="new_code">NoPatternExpectation</span></td><td>Passes only if failing a Perl Regex</td>
</tr>
                    <tr>
<td><span class="new_code">IsAExpectation</span></td><td>Checks the type or class name only</td>
</tr>
                    <tr>
<td><span class="new_code">NotAExpectation</span></td><td>Opposite of the <span class="new_code">IsAExpectation</span></td>
</tr>
                    <tr>
<td><span class="new_code">MethodExistsExpectation</span></td><td>Checks a method is available on an object</td>
</tr>
                </tbody>
</table>
                Most take the expected value in the constructor.
                The exceptions are the pattern matchers, which take a regular expression,
                and the <span class="new_code">IsAExpectation</span> and <span class="new_code">NotAExpectation</span> which takes a type
                or class name as a string.
            </p>
        
        <p>
<a class="target" name="behaviour">
<h2>Using expectations to control stubs</h2>
</a>
</p>
            <p>
                The expectation classes can be used not just for sending assertions
                from mock objects, but also for selecting behaviour for the
                <a href="mock_objects_documentation.html">mock objects</a>.
                Anywhere a list of arguments is given, a list of expectation objects
                can be inserted instead.
            </p>
            <p>
                Suppose we want an authorisation server mock to simulate a successful login
                only if it receives a valid session object.
                We can do this as follows...
<pre>
Mock::generate('Authorisation');
<strong>
$authorisation = new MockAuthorisation();
$authorisation-&gt;setReturnValue(
        'isAllowed',
        true,
        array(new IsAExpectation('Session', 'Must be a session')));
$authorisation-&gt;setReturnValue('isAllowed', false);</strong>
</pre>
                We have set the default mock behaviour to return false when
                <span class="new_code">isAllowed</span> is called.
                When we call the method with a single parameter that
                is a <span class="new_code">Session</span> object, it will return true.
                We have also added a second parameter as a message.
                This will be displayed as part of the mock object
                failure message if this expectation is the cause of
                a failure.
            </p>
            <p>
                This kind of sophistication is rarely useful, but is included for
                completeness.
            </p>
        
        <p>
<a class="target" name="extending">
<h2>Creating your own expectations</h2>
</a>
</p>
            <p>
                The expectation classes have a very simple structure.
                So simple that it is easy to create your own versions for
                commonly used test logic.
            </p>
            <p>
                As an example here is the creation of a class to test for
                valid IP addresses.
                In order to work correctly with the stubs and mocks the new
                expectation class should extend
                <span class="new_code">SimpleExpectation</span>...
<pre>
<strong>class ValidIp extends SimpleExpectation {
    
    function test($ip) {
        return (ip2long($ip) != -1);
    }
    
    function testMessage($ip) {
        return "Address [$ip] should be a valid IP address";
    }
}</strong>
</pre>
                There are only two methods to implement.
                The <span class="new_code">test()</span> method should
                evaluate to true if the expectation is to pass, and
                false otherwise.
                The <span class="new_code">testMessage()</span> method
                should simply return some helpful text explaining the test
                that was carried out.
            </p>
            <p>
                This class can now be used in place of the earlier expectation
                classes.
            </p>
        
        <p>
<a class="target" name="unit">
<h2>Under the bonnet of the unit tester</h2>
</a>
</p>
            <p>
                The <a href="http://sourceforge.net/projects/simpletest/">SimpleTest unit testing framework</a>
                also uses the expectation classes internally for the
                <a href="unit_test_documentation.html">UnitTestCase class</a>.
                We can also take advantage of these mechanisms to reuse our
                homebrew expectation classes within the test suites directly.
            </p>
            <p>
                The most crude way of doing this is to use the
                <span class="new_code">SimpleTest::assert()</span> method to
                test against it directly...
<pre>
<strong>class TestOfNetworking extends UnitTestCase {
    ...
    function testGetValidIp() {
        $server = &amp;new Server();
        $this-&gt;assert(
                new ValidIp(),
                $server-&gt;getIp(),
                'Server IP address-&gt;%s');
    }
}</strong>
</pre>
                This is a little untidy compared with our usual
                <span class="new_code">assert...()</span> syntax.
            </p>
            <p>
                For such a simple case we would normally create a
                separate assertion method on our test case rather
                than bother using the expectation class.
                If we pretend that our expectation is a little more
                complicated for a moment, so that we want to reuse it,
                we get...
<pre>
class TestOfNetworking extends UnitTestCase {
    ...<strong>
    function assertValidIp($ip, $message = '%s') {
        $this-&gt;assert(new ValidIp(), $ip, $message);
    }</strong>
    
    function testGetValidIp() {
        $server = &amp;new Server();<strong>
        $this-&gt;assertValidIp(
                $server-&gt;getIp(),
                'Server IP address-&gt;%s');</strong>
    }
}
</pre>
                It is unlikely we would ever need this degree of control
                over the testing machinery.
                It is rare to need the expectations for more than pattern
                matching.
                Also, complex expectation classes could make the tests
                harder to read and debug.
                These mechanisms are really of most use to authors of systems
                that will extend the test framework to create their own tool set.
            </p>
        
    </div>
<div class="copyright">
            Copyright<br>Marcus Baker, Jason Sweat, Perrick Penet 2004
        </div>
</body>
</html>
Subversion-Projekte lars-tiefland.prado

(root)/tests/test_tools/simpletest/docs/en/expectation_documentation.html – Revision 1
