OK, you mean there might be allot of functionallity and, or, vendors supplying Unit Testing software? I would guess that's what you mean. I just would like the 50,000 foot view rather than a comprehensive analysis of technicals. In other words, how do you use unit testing in say a Visual Studio VWD or VB.net Application as you develop it as opposed to using the syntax checker and built in test environment. Ya, just a quick overview is what I would like so I get a general concept of what it is and the process used. Thanks again: Rick USA ----- Original Message ----- From: Jacques Bosch To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 8:07 AM Subject: Re: Unit Testing in .Net Sit back, and wait for the approaching information overload! :) On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 3:01 PM, RicksPlace <ofbgmail@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: Hi Guys: What is this Unit Testing all about? The way I always worked was to develop a project in a modular fashon. I plan, design and then code and test one module at a time so I know my modules are working before going on to the next module. How is this diferent from Unit Testing? I see a bunch of software out there for Unit Testing and it all sounds complicated but perhaps I don't really understand, actually I really don't understand, what it is all about. Later and thanks: Rick USA ----- Original Message ----- From: Jacques Bosch To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 6:51 AM Subject: Re: Unit Testing in .Net >measure twice, cut once. And not the fingers either! On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Kerneels Roos <kerneels@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: Wise words from a wise man! On 2/15/2011 1:33 PM, Homme, James wrote: Hi Kerneels, I had a Wood Shop teacher who told me measure twice, cut once. Jim Jim Homme, Usability Services, Phone: 412-544-1810. Skype: jim.homme Internal recipients, Read my accessibility blog. Discuss accessibility here. Accessibility Wiki: Breaking news and accessibility advice -----Original Message----- From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kerneels Roos Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 2:27 AM To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Unit Testing in .Net Hi Dave, The more I read about it and try it for myself the more I can see the value of unit testing. it looks however like something you need to do from day one of the coding of a project. It's very hard to come in afterwards and add tests to code that is suspect. I'm very impressed with NUnit, but the GUI runner I don't find very accessible unfortunately. Most frameworks seem to have a command line runner also, so one can do that. Apart from the May 2009 book "The Art of Unit Testing ", there's also a seemingly seminal book on TDD from 2002 focussing on Java -- can't find the details now unfortunately, the author is Ken Peck. What I do realise is that , for years now I've been coding and then testing while TDD is the other way around. The code then test approach is more of a cowboy coder / hacker style which sutes the creative, risk taking right brainers :-). To shift to the test then code approach might take some time and effort. Now that I think about it, TDD makes a lot of sense for VI or blind folks. If used properly it can minimise the need for debuggers. Don't know about you guys, but I don't particularly like using a debugger. Forgive the rambling. Kerneels On 2/14/2011 6:00 AM, Dave wrote: With that said, lots of people don't follow TDD or some variant because it does take a lot more time. You also have to consider that test code usually piles up *very* quickly. You could have a few hundred lines of code and to thoroughly test it (i.e. if you used TDD, or if you measure code coverage), you'll need triple that in test code or more. Once you make any changes in the production code, you end up spending lots of time making changes to the pile of test code. Not to say that you shouldn't test thoroughly, but lots don't (especially to the degree they should) for some valid reasons. If you can pull it off, it certainly will give your users less headaches when trying to use your products. It's one of those "open ended" problems; there's reasonable points to stop writing tests, but never a "end" as there's always some other condition you could try for an sufficiently complex piece of software. You also don't want to go down the road of testing user interface components as it requires hooking deeply into OS level events (most ironically, accessibility is useful here). On 2/13/11, Kerneels Roos<kerneels@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: Thanks Dave, It is not so nice to come in afterwards and write tests for classes, which I'm doing now to ensure everything works right, but I can imagine a TDD approach could work very well indeed. As I understand it, TDD is also core to XP (extreme programming). For anything new I'm going to write tests before coding and also look into TDD more formally. Once you know how to code and design algorithms one should invest in some solid software engineering techniques and get a good methodology to follow. I strongly believe it will save tons of time and produce far better software if the project is anything larger than a simple CRUD system. I can't decide if the book "The Art of Unit Testing" is worth the $24 or not though :-) Regards On 2/13/2011 8:55 AM, Dave wrote: The general approach advocated by some is that of Test Driven Development. I have to say that whatever I've written using this approach has been far more robust when it comes to quality. The .Net unit test frameworks of which NUnit is only one, all have lots in common. Visual Studio comes with a unit test framework as well and integrates the running of tests within VS itself. The actual tool chosen is a personal choice -- if you like integration with VS for example or something independent. What tool's UI do you like, etc. Basically, they all use .Net attributes to "markup" methods and classes with metadata; think test name, test description, run time, category, etc. Then, at runtime, the runner just via reflection grabs all of the tests and invokes them programmatically. As for TDD, if you're not familiar with it, I'd recommend looking it up. Essentially, you write tests before actually even implementing anything. The tests serve as a statement of what you expect to be true. This obviously requires that you iron out what your class interface should look like; this might not be the style you're used to and something C++ developers are more acustomed to. However, as you go along, you already have a set of validation tests that verify that your stuff actually works without doing the tedious pattern of compile, run, manually check if it works, and rinse/repeat. On 2/11/11, Jacques Bosch<jfbosch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: I've had good success with NUnit. On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Kerneels Roos<kerneels@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: Hi, I've investigated NUnit and it'the GUI is quite accessible with JFW. Also interested in MBUnit / Galeo but haven't tested the GUI yet. Unit testing seems like a brilliant way to develop better code and keep it working while changing things. Advantage of NUnit is that the syntax is XUnit compatible, so what you learn there directly applies to a host of other unit test frameworks and languages. The more advanced Galeo / MBUnit is also XUnit compatible should you need more power later on. Could anyone recommend a good book on this topic / some comments of your own experience? I hope unit testing isn't just an accademic ideal but actually something that can be done economically. I found this e-book (PDF, epub and mobiM): http://www.manning.com/osherove/ but it's from 2009 and doesn't seem to cover Galeo. Any comments most welcome! Regards, Kerneels -- Kerneels Roos Cell: +27 (0)82 309 1998 Skype: cornelis.roos "There are only two kinds of programming languages in the world; those everyone complains about, and those nobody uses." __________ View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind -- Jacques Bosch Software Architecture and Development Independent Contractor Cell: +27 824711807 Fax: +27 86 504 4726 E-Mail: jfbosch@xxxxxxxxx __________ View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind -- Kerneels Roos Cell: +27 (0)82 309 1998 Skype: cornelis.roos "There are only two kinds of programming languages in the world; those everyone complains about, and those nobody uses." __________ View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind __________ View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind -- Kerneels Roos Cell: +27 (0)82 309 1998 Skype: cornelis.roos "There are only two kinds of programming languages in the world; those everyone complains about, and those nobody uses." __________ View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind This e-mail and any attachments to it are confidential and are intended solely for use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and then delete it. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not keep, use, disclose, copy or distribute this e-mail without the author's prior permission. The views expressed in this e-mail message do not necessarily represent the views of Highmark Inc., its subsidiaries, or affiliates. __________ View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind -- Kerneels Roos Cell: +27 (0)82 309 1998 Skype: cornelis.roos "There are only two kinds of programming languages in the world; those everyone complains about, and those nobody uses." __________ View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind -- Jacques Bosch Software Architecture and Development Independent Contractor Cell: +27 824711807 Fax: +27 86 504 4726 E-Mail: jfbosch@xxxxxxxxx -- Jacques Bosch Software Architecture and Development Independent Contractor Cell: +27 824711807 Fax: +27 86 504 4726 E-Mail: jfbosch@xxxxxxxxx