Approval testing from basic to advanced
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
3 likes•1,195 views
The document discusses patterns for more powerful asserts when doing approval testing. It outlines 7 approaches to asserting values in approval tests, moving from simple number and string assertions to more complex objects, files, automatically generated names, custom verification methods, and using diff tools to compare outputs on failure. The goal is to make approval testing more expressive and tests less cluttered while still using normal test scenarios.
Report
Share
Approval testing from basic to advanced
- 1. Common Path for Approval Testing patterns for more powerful asserts @LlewellynFalco
- 2. English CodeResult Whiteboard // Create side (0,0) – (3,4) // Verify length Side s = new Side(0,0,3,4); Approvals.Verify(s + “ length = “ +s.Length); Side (0,0) – (3,4) length = 5 Testing Circle
- 3. 1) Numbers // verify 2 names assert(2, names.length) Easy Simple
- 4. 1) Numbers // verify names assert(5, names.length) assert(“Llew”, names[0]) assert(“Woody”, names[1]) assert(“Jim”, names[2]) assert(“Jason”, names[3]) assert(“Dan”, names[4]) Can get complicated I have to change my Scenarios to make it work
- 5. 1. Specification 2. Feedback 3. Regression 4. Granularity
- 6. 2) Strings // verify names Assert( “[Llew, Woody, Jim, Jason, Dan]”, names.toString()) More expressive Objects, Tests & Logs Can use your normal Scenarios
- 7. 2) Strings You’ll start to want more… // verify names Assert( “[Llew, Woody, Jim, Jason, Dan]”, names.toString())
- 8. 3) // verify json Assert( “{age:12, name:Tom, address: 123 fake st}”, tom.toString()) Easy to test bigger concepts Long strings
- 9. 3) // verify xml Assert( “<xml><person>nt<name>tom<name>n t<age>”13”<age>nt</person>”, tom.toString()) Can get very bigLong strings Line endings Scoping Matters can != should
- 10. 4) Files // verify companies as xml assertFileContains( “expected.companylist.xml”, report.toString()) Less Clutter Can use your normal Scenarios
- 11. 4) Files // verify companies as xml assertFileContains( “expected.companylist.xml”, report.toString()) Lots of filenames Creating The files
- 12. 5) // verify companies as xml Verify(report) Convention over configuration Code starts to become trivial Automatic names
- 13. 5) // verify companies as xml Verify(report) What went wrong? Automatic names
- 15. See the forest & the trees Files not limited to text 6) Diff Tools Can render html, svg, etc… (on failure)
- 16. Duplication in the tests6) Diff Tools On failure event is pretty basic (on failure)
- 17. Testing gets easier & easier7) Custom Test Methods MapReduce.verify(…) Wpf.verify(…) Xml.verify(…) Routing.verify(…) Tests give high Return on Investment
- 18. 1. Numb3rs 2. “Strings” 3. “VeryrnLongrnStrings” 4. Files.txt 5. AutomaticNames() 6. DIFF TOOLS DIFF T00LS 7. Test.CustomVerify()