Hi Carsten,
I don't know if there were any reasons historically that precluded use of
the parameterized test pattern, but I think it can be quite useful if you
are able to make use of it.
Another test class that could benefit is FlexibleStringExpanderTests where
the parameterized test pattern appears to have been implemented without
test library support.
A benefit of converting FlexibleStringExpanderTests would be that all the
various parameterized tests would contribute to the overall test count of a
build, rather than being rolled up as part of the public testParsing(),
testWithVerbosity() and testQuietly() methods.
Thanks,
Dan.
On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 15:43, Carsten Schinzer <
cars...@dcs-verkaufssysteme.de> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
>
> I find no other reference to org.junit.Parameterized in the code stack on
> trunk which indicates that no-one else has committed parameterized unit
> tests. I am asking because I have a test case where I would need that (I
> want to run all options for the CustRequestStatusType against the status
> check service an be sure it return the expected result) and when
> implementing I find that my IDE hints that „There is no default constructor
> available in class ‚org.apache.ofbiz.service.testtools.OFBizTestCase‘“.
>
>
> package org.apache.ofbiz.order
>
> import org.apache.ofbiz.service.ServiceUtil
> import org.apache.ofbiz.service.testtools.OFBizTestCase
> import org.junit.Test
> import org.junit.runner.RunWith
> import org.junit.runners.Parameterized
> import org.junit.runners.Parameterized.Parameters
>
> @RunWith(Parameterized)
> class CustRequestStatusTests extends OFBizTestCase {
> private String status
> private String expect
> private String scenario
>
> @Parameters static scenarios() {[
> ['CRQ_DRAFT', 'PASS', 'CustRequest status Draft expected to
> PASS'],
> ['CRQ_SUBMITTED', 'PASS', 'CustRequest status Submitted expected
> to PASS'],
> ['CRQ_ACCEPTED', 'PASS', 'CustRequest status Accepted expected to
> PASS'],
> ['CRQ_REVIEWED', 'PASS', 'CustRequest status Reviewed expected to
> PASS'],
> ['CRQ_PENDING', 'PASS', 'CustRequest status Pending expected to
> PASS'],
> ['CRQ_COMPLETED', 'FAIL', 'CustRequest status Completed expected
> to FAIL'],
> ['CRQ_REJECTED', 'PASS', 'CustRequest status Rejected expected to
> PASS'],
> ['CRQ_CANCELLED', 'FAIL', 'CustRequest status Cancelled expected
> to FAIL'],
> ]*.toArray()}
>
> public CustRequestStatusTests(String name, String status, String
> expect, String scenario) {
> this.expect = expect
> this.scenario = scenario
> this.status = status
> super(name)
> }
>
> /* Testing custRequestStatusCheck Service Implementation
> *
> * available test data:
> * (...)
> * <CustRequest custRequestId="9000" custRequestDate="2008-07-28
> 09:45:31.928" custRequestTypeId="RF_QUOTE" statusId="CRQ_ACCEPTED"
> fromPartyId="DemoCustomer" priority="9" custRequestName="Customer Request
> Usage" description="Demo CustRequest" productStoreId="9000"/>
> * <CustRequestItem custRequestId="9000" statusId="CRQ_ACCEPTED"
> custRequestItemSeqId="00001" productId="GZ-1001" story="This can be the
> longer story of an item on the customer request."/>
> *
> * */
> @Test void testCustRequestStatusCheckEmpty() {
> Map input = [
> custRequestId: '9001',
> ]
> Map result = dispatcher.runSync('checkStatusCustRequest', input)
> assert ServiceUtil.isError(result)
> // assert error message refers to certain text element
> }
>
> @Test void testCustRequestStatusCheckWrongStatus() {
> Map input = [
> custRequestId: '9000',
> statusId: this.status,
> ]
> Map result = dispatcher.runSync('checkStatusCustRequest', input)
> if(this.expect == 'PASS') {
> assert ServiceUtil.isSuccess(result)
> } else {
> assert ServiceUtil.isFailure(result)
> }
> }
> }
>
>
>
> This hint certainly has to do with the implementation I need to do for
> such test cases using annotations to mark the class as @Parameterized,
> define the @Parameters and then mark the @Test that uses the parameters.
>
> Before I dive too much into web search:
> - has anyone attempted this for OFBiz unit Testing? (And hence the reason
> why no implementation is avail)
>
> Thanks for a hint :)
> Warm regards
>
>
> Carsten
>
>
>
>
>
--
Daniel Watford
