Develop Reference

GuardClauseAssertion does not fail if limited to only public constructors

Why does this unit test not fail when no guard clause is present?
[Test]
public void ConstructorLooksGuardedAgainstNulls()
{
// ARRANGE
var fixture = new Fixture();
var assertion = fixture.Create<GuardClauseAssertion>();
// ACT & ASSERT
assertion.Verify(typeof(TestClass).GetConstructors(BindingFlags.Public));
}
Classes used in unit test:
public class TestBaseClass
{
private readonly string _firstDependency;
private readonly string _secondDependency;
protected TestBaseClass(string firstDependency, string secondDependency)
{
_firstDependency = firstDependency;
_secondDependency = secondDependency;
}
}
public class TestClass : TestBaseClass
{
public TestClass(string firstDependency)
: base(firstDependency, string.Empty)
{
}
}
I removed all the irrelevant lines.

This will return all public constructors, and then the test will fail as expected:
typeof(TestClass).GetConstructors()
The version with the BindingFlags parameter doesn't return the public constructors (although it reads like it really should do). Because no constructor are found, the test passes
typeof(TestClass).GetConstructors(BindingFlags.Public)

Moq an object in a static class

I can't get Moq to mock an object that gets created in a static method.
Here is my moq and code
code:
public interface IConfigHelper
{
string GetConfiguration(string sectionName, string elementName);
}
public class ConfigHelper : IConfigHelper
{
public ConfigHelper() { }
public virtual string GetConfiguration(string sectionName, string elementName)
{
string retValue = String.Empty;
//Does things to get configuration and return a value
return retValue;
}
}
public class myRealClass
{
public myRealClass(){}
public string myworkingMethod()
{
var retValue = String.Empty;
retValue = utilSvc.GetConfigurationValue();
return retValue;
}
}
public static class utilSvc
{
public static string GetConfigurationValue()
{
ConfigHelper configUtil = new ConfigHelper(); //NOT BEING MOCKED
return configUtil.GetConfiguration("sectionName/sectionElement", "ClinicalSystem");
}
}
the Test using Moq
[TestFixture(TestName = "Tests")]
public class Tests
{
private Mock<IConfigHelper> configHelperMOCK;
[SetUp]
public void Setup()
{
configHelperMOCK = new Mock<IConfigHelper>();
}
[Test]
public void serviceIsBPManagementForValidSource()
{
//Arrange
string sectionName = "sectionName/sectionElement";
string clinicalElementName = "ClinicalSystem";
string clinicalElementValue = "Zedmed";
configHelperMOCK.Setup(s => s.GetConfiguration(sectionName, clinicalElementName)).Returns(clinicalElementValue);
//act
// the call to myRealClass
//assert
// test assertions
}
}
The issue that I am having is with this line:
ConfigHelper configUtil = new ConfigHelper(); //NOT BEING MOCKED
I cannot get the moq to Mock the object.
I do not want the code to read the config file. I wish to moq away this instance of ConfigHelper

You can't wrap the static class/method but you can redirect it
public static class UtilSvc
{
static UtilSvc()
{
CreatorFunc = () => new ConfigHelper();
}
public static Func<IConfigHelper> CreatorFunc { get; set; }
public static string GetConfigurationValue()
{
var configUtil = CreatorFunc();
return configUtil.GetConfiguration("sectionName/sectionElement",
"ClinicalSystem");
}
}
and then in the test
//...
private Mock<IConfigHelper> configHelperMOCK;
[SetUp]
public void Setup()
{
configHelperMOCK = new Mock<IConfigHelper>();
UtilService.CreatorFunc = () => configHelperMOCK.Object;
}
//...

You cannot mock static class. I would rather propose to inject that IConfigHelper into the myRealClass. That is the usual way how to decouple dependencies and use DI.
public class myRealClass
{
private IConfigHelper _configHelper;
public myRealClass(IConfigHelper configHelper)
{
_configHelper = configHelper;
}
public string myworkingMethod()
{
var retValue = String.Empty;
retValue = _configHelper.GetConfigurationValue();
return retValue;
}
}

Avoid coupling your code to static classes, which in most cases cause you code be to difficult to maintain and test.
Follow the Explicit Dependencies Principle
Methods and classes should explicitly require (typically through
method parameters or constructor parameters) any collaborating objects
they need in order to function correctly.
Give the article a read. It is short and very informative.
If you want to keep the static class then you wrap the static class behind an abstraction.
public interface IUtilSvc {
string GetConfigurationValue();
}
public class utilSvcWrapper : IUtilSvc {
public string GetConfigurationValue() {
return utilSvc.GetConfigurationValue(); //Calling static service
}
}
Or another option is that utlSvc does not have to be static if can be injected into dependent classes
public class utilSvc : IUtilScv {
private readonly IConfigHelper configUtil;
public utilSvc(IConfigHelper configHelper) {
configUtil = configHelper;
}
public string GetConfigurationValue() {
return configUtil.GetConfiguration("sectionName/sectionElement", "ClinicalSystem");
}
}
Inject the IUtilScv into the dependent class so that it is no longer dependent on static class.
public class myRealClass {
private readonly IUtilScv utilSvc;
//Explicit dependency inject via constructor
public myRealClass(IUtilScv utilSvc) {
this.utilSvc = utilSvc;
}
public string myworkingMethod() {
var retValue = utilSvc.GetConfiguration();
return retValue;
}
}
In that case you don't even need IConfigHelper when testing as it has also been abstracted away. And you only need to mock the dependencies needed for the test.
[TestFixture(TestName = "Tests")]
public class Tests {
private Mock<IUtilScv> utilScvMOCK;
[SetUp]
public void Setup() {
utilScvMOCK = new Mock<IUtilScv>();
}
[Test]
public void serviceIsBPManagementForValidSource() {
//Arrange
var expectedClinicalElementValue = "Zedmed";
utilScvMOCK
.Setup(s => s.GetConfiguration())
.Returns(expectedClinicalElementValue)
.Verifiable();
var sut = new myRealClass(utilScvMOCK.Object);
//Act
var actualClinicalElementValue = sut.myworkingMethod();
//Assert
configHelperMOCK.Verify();
Assert.AreEqual(expectedClinicalElementValue, actualClinicalElementValue);
}
}

Test Environment.Exit() in C#

Is there in C# some kind of equivalent of ExpectedSystemExit in Java? I have an exit in my code and would really like to be able to test it. The only thing I found in C# is a not really nice workaround.
Example Code
public void CheckRights()
{
if(!service.UserHasRights())
{
Environment.Exit(1);
}
}
Test Code
[TestMethod]
public void TestCheckRightsWithoutRights()
{
MyService service = ...
service.UserHasRights().Returns(false);
???
}
I am using the VS framework for testing (+ NSubstitute for mocking) but it is not a problem to switch to nunit or whatever for this test.

You should use dependency injection to supply to the class being tested an interface that provides an environmental exit.
For example:
public interface IEnvironment
{
void Exit(int code);
}
Let's also assume that you have an interface for calling UserHasRights():
public interface IRightsService
{
bool UserHasRights();
}
Now suppose your class to be tested looks like this:
public sealed class RightsChecker
{
readonly IRightsService service;
readonly IEnvironment environment;
public RightsChecker(IRightsService service, IEnvironment environment)
{
this.service = service;
this.environment = environment;
}
public void CheckRights()
{
if (!service.UserHasRights())
{
environment.Exit(1);
}
}
}
Now you can use a mocking framework to check that IEnvironment .Exit() is called under the right conditions. For example, using Moq it might look a bit like this:
[TestMethod]
public static void CheckRights_exits_program_when_user_has_no_rights()
{
var rightsService = new Mock<IRightsService>();
rightsService.Setup(foo => foo.UserHasRights()).Returns(false);
var enviromnent = new Mock<IEnvironment>();
var rightsChecker = new RightsChecker(rightsService.Object, enviromnent.Object);
rightsChecker.CheckRights();
enviromnent.Verify(foo => foo.Exit(1));
}
Ambient contexts and cross-cutting concerns
A method such as Environment.Exit() could be considered to be a cross-cutting concern, and you might well want to avoid passing around an interface for it because you can end up with an explosion of additional constructor parameters. (Note: The canonical example of a cross cutting concern is DateTime.Now.)
To address this issue, you can introduce an "Ambient context" - a pattern which allows you to use a static method while still retaining the ability to unit test calls to it. Of course, such things should be used sparingly and only for true cross-cutting concerns.
For example, you could introduce an ambient context for Environment like so:
public abstract class EnvironmentControl
{
public static EnvironmentControl Current
{
get
{
return _current;
}
set
{
if (value == null)
throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(value));
_current = value;
}
}
public abstract void Exit(int value);
public static void ResetToDefault()
{
_current = DefaultEnvironmentControl.Instance;
}
static EnvironmentControl _current = DefaultEnvironmentControl.Instance;
}
public class DefaultEnvironmentControl : EnvironmentControl
{
public override void Exit(int value)
{
Environment.Exit(value);
}
public static DefaultEnvironmentControl Instance => _instance.Value;
static readonly Lazy<DefaultEnvironmentControl> _instance = new Lazy<DefaultEnvironmentControl>(() => new DefaultEnvironmentControl());
}
Normal code just calls EnvironmentControl.Current.Exit(). With this change, the IEnvironment parameter disappears from the RightsChecker class:
public sealed class RightsChecker
{
readonly IRightsService service;
public RightsChecker(IRightsService service)
{
this.service = service;
}
public void CheckRights()
{
if (!service.UserHasRights())
{
EnvironmentControl.Current.Exit(1);
}
}
}
But we still retain the ability to unit-test that it has been called:
public static void CheckRights_exits_program_when_user_has_no_rights()
{
var rightsService = new Mock<IRightsService>();
rightsService.Setup(foo => foo.UserHasRights()).Returns(false);
var enviromnent = new Mock<EnvironmentControl>();
EnvironmentControl.Current = enviromnent.Object;
try
{
var rightsChecker = new RightsChecker(rightsService.Object);
rightsChecker.CheckRights();
enviromnent.Verify(foo => foo.Exit(1));
}
finally
{
EnvironmentControl.ResetToDefault();
}
}
For more information about ambient contexts, see here.

I ended up creating a new method which I can then mock in my tests.
Code
public void CheckRights()
{
if(!service.UserHasRights())
{
Environment.Exit(1);
}
}
internal virtual void Exit()
{
Environment.Exit(1);
}
Unit test
[TestMethod]
public void TestCheckRightsWithoutRights()
{
MyService service = ...
service.When(svc => svc.Exit()).DoNotCallBase();
...
service.CheckRights();
service.Received(1).Exit();
}

If your goal is to avoid extra classes/interfaces just to support tests, how do you feel about Environment.Exit action via Property Injection?
class RightsChecker
{
public Action AccessDeniedAction { get; set; }
public RightsChecker(...)
{
...
AccessDeniedAction = () => Environment.Exit();
}
}
[Test]
public TestCheckRightsWithoutRights()
{
...
bool wasAccessDeniedActionExecuted = false;
rightsChecker.AccessDeniedAction = () => { wasAccessDeniedActionExecuted = true; }
...
Assert.That(wasAccessDeniedActionExecuted , Is.True);
}

Passing a SqlConnection to class library file (dll)

I am busy developing a class library project in C# to be reused and attached to different projects in future. It will mainly be used for Table Valued Parameters. My question is, how do I pass a SQL connection to it? The connection will be instantiated in another (main project) that the .dll gets attached to.
I currently have a Class Library Project, and have a Console Application Project created in the same solution for testing purposed.
One last requirement is that I don't want to use ConfigurationManager as the connection string will not be stored in app.config or web.config and by default the queries must be passed back to the calling application.
I've come accross a couple of links like the one below, but nothing I can really use:
Sharing a connection string
Please excuse the noobness, I am 7 weeks into professional programming.

In your dll, simply require an IDbConnection or IDbCommand. All the method is then properly abstracted against the interfaces for the data access.
For example:
In your shared dll
public static int LookUpIntForSomething(IDbConnection connection)
{
using (var command = connection.CreateCommand())
{
// use command.
}
}
In your calling app
using (var connection = new SqlConnection("ConnectionString"))
{
var int = DbQueries.LookupIntForSomething(connection);
}

This is excellent example for dependency injection. I would recommend using enterprise library unity for this kind of stuff. In your data access layer library I would define interface:
public interface IConnectionProvider {
string ConnectionString { get; }
}
public interface IAccountProvider {
Account GetAccountById(int accountID);
}
internal class AccountProvider : IAccountProvider {
private IConnectionProvider _connectionProvider;
public AccountProvider(IConnectionProvider connectionProvider) {
if (connectionProvider == null) {
throw new ArgumentNullException("connectionProvider");
}
_connectionProvider = connectionProvider;
}
public Account GetAccountById(int accountID) {
Account result;
using(var conn = new SqlConnection(connectionProvider)) {
// retrieve result here
}
return result;
}
}
public static class Bootstrapper {
public static void Init() {
ServiceLocator.AddSingleton<IAccountProvider, AccountProvider>();
}
}
Then in any assembly using your data access library you can define implementation for IConnectionProvider, like this:
internal class WebConnectionProvider : IConnectionProvider {
public string ConnectionString { get { return "Server=..."; } }
}
internal static class WebBootstrapper {
public static void Init() {
Bootstrapper.Init();
ServiceLocator.AddSingleton<IConnectionProvider, WebConnectionProvider>();
}
}
And anywhere after you call WebBootstrapper.Init() in your assembly you can use:
var accountProvider = ServiceLocator.Resolve<IAccountProvider>();
accountProvider.GetAccountById(1);
Service locator:
using System;
using Microsoft.Practices.Unity;
public class ServiceLocator {
private IUnityContainer m_Container = new UnityContainer();
public void Add<TFrom, TTo>() where TTo : TFrom {
m_Container.RegisterType<TFrom, TTo>();
}
public void BuildUp<T>(T instance) {
m_Container.BuildUp<T>(instance);
}
public void BuildUp(Type type, object instance) {
m_Container.BuildUp(type, instance);
}
public void AddSingleton<TFrom, TTo>() where TTo : TFrom {
m_Container.RegisterType<TFrom, TTo>(new ContainerControlledLifetimeManager());
}
public void AddInstance<T>(T instance) {
m_Container.RegisterInstance<T>(instance);
}
public T Resolve<T>() {
return m_Container.Resolve<T>();
}
private static ServiceLocator m_Instance;
public static ServiceLocator Instance {
get { return m_Instance; }
}
static ServiceLocator() {
m_Instance = new ServiceLocator();
}
}

if i understand your requirements correctly,I'm not sure that i do, i would setup a static struct as such
public static struct ConnectionString
{
public int ID;
public string Connection;
public override string ToString()
{
return Connection;
}
public static ConnectionString DataBase1 = new ConnectionString{ ID = 1 , Connection = "YourConnectionStringhere"};
public static ConnectionString DataBase2 = new ConnectionString{ ID = 2 , Connection = "YourConnectionString2here"};
}
and then use it as such
public void SomeMethod()
{
var I = ReferencedDll.DoSomething(ConnectionString.DataBase1.ToString());
}
or
public void SomeMethod()
{
var ClassFromDll = new ReferencedDll.SomeClass(ConnectionString.DataBase1.ToString());
ClassFromDll.DoSomething();
}
of course this leaves your connection strings hard coded which is not ideal

Migration from MBUnit v2 to v3 and the ProviderFactory is gone

In MBUnit v2 I did this:
public class ConnectionStringFactory
{
[Factory]
public string ConnectionString
{
get
{
return ConfigurationManager.ConnectionStrings["MyConnection"].ConnectionString;
}
}
}
[ProviderFactory(typeof(ConnectionStringFactory),typeof(string))]
public class CustomerTests
{
public void GetCustomerTest(string connectionString)
{
}
public void GetCustomersTest(string connectionString)
{
}
}
I had to create ONE Factory class returning me a connectionString which gets injected into each test method of a unit test class.
How can this be done with MBUnit v3 where the ProviderFactory is gone?
I played a lot with the Factory class, but the result is not what I want.
I want to a Connection string factory used by all test classes where the connection string
is injected into each test method automatically.

How about this?
public static class ConnectionStringFactory
{
public static IEnumerable<string> GetConnectionString()
{
yield return "connString";
}
}
[Factory(typeof(ConnectionStringFactory), "GetConnectionString")]
public class CustomerTests
{
[Test]
public void GetCustomerTest(string connectionString)
{
Console.WriteLine(connectionString);
}
[Test]
public void GetCustomersTest(string connectionString)
{
Console.WriteLine(connectionString);
}
}