When i run cucumber it displays the
possible steps that i should define, an example from the RSpec book:
1 scenario (1 undefined)
4 steps (4 undefined)
0m0.001s
You can implement step definitions for undefined steps with these snippets:
Given /^I am not yet playing$/ do
pending
end
When /^I start a new game$/ do
pending
end
Then /^the game should say “Welcome to CodeBreaker”$/ do
pending
end
Then /^the game should say “Enter guess:”$/ do
pending
end
Is there a way that it will automaticly create the step definitions file, so i don't have to
rewrite or copy paste by hand but i can just to customize them to be more generic?
Cucumber doesn't offer this feature. Probably because you would have to tell it where to put the step definitions file, and what to name it.
Like Kevin said, Cucumber would have to know the name of the file to put it in, and there are no good defaults to go with, other than using the same file name as the feature file. And that is something I consider an antipattern: http://wiki.github.com/aslakhellesoy/cucumber/feature-coupled-steps-antipattern
Intellij Idea or RubyIDE does exactly what you are asking for:
Detects missing step definitions
Creates missing step definitions in a new file (you choose the name of the file) or in one of the existing step definition files
Highlights matched step parameters
see http://i48.tinypic.com/10r63o4.gif for a step by step picture
Enjoy
There is a possibility this kind of feature could be useful, but as Kevin says, it doesn't exist at present. But it could also get quite messy, quite quickly.
Maybe you already do this, but there's nothing stopping you cut and pasting the output direct into your text editor, or even piping the output direct to your text editor if you're so inclined. Then at least you're getting pretty much most of the way there, bar creating the file and naming.
try this https://github.com/unxusr/kiwi it auto generate your feature file and make the step definitions file for you and you just fill in the steps with code.
In later version will write the code of the steps and run the test all of that automagically
You can use a work around way to generate steps file
all you have to do is to run the Cucumber on a feature doesn't have defined steps by identify a specific feature as the following command:
1) using path
bundle exec cucumber {PATH}
note path would start with features/....
for example
features/users/login.feature
1) using tags
bundle exec cucumber --tags=#{TAG}
note tag should be above your scenario in the steps file
for example
#TAG
Scenario:
And you will have the suggested steps in the console with pending status
Related
I have two cucumber feature ( DeleteAccountingYear.feature and AddAccountingYear.feature).
How can i do to make that the second feature(AddAccountingYear.feature) run before the first one (AddAccountingYear.feature).
I concur with #alannichols about tests being independent of each other. Thats a fundamental aspect of automation suite. Otherwise we will end up with a unmaintainable, flaky test suite.
To run a certain feature file before running another feature appears to me like a test design issue.
Cucumber provides few options to solve issues like this:
a) Is DeleteAccountingYear.feature really a feature of its own? If not you can use the cucumber Background: option. The steps provided in the background will be run for each scenario in that feature file. So your AddAccountingYear.feature will look like this:
Feature: AddingAccountingYear
Background:
Given I have deleted accounting year
Scenario Outline: add new accounting year
Then I add new account year
b) If DeleteAccountingYear.feature is indeed a feature of its own and needs to be in its own feature file, then you can use setup and teardown functions. In cucumber this can be achieved using hooks. You can tag AddDeleteAccountingYear.feature with a certain tag say #doAfterDeleteAccountYear. Now from the Before hooks you can do the required setup for this specific tag. The before hooks(for ruby) will look like:
Before('#doAfterDeleteAccountYear') do
#Call the function to delete the account year
end
If the delete account year is written as a function, then the only thing required is to call this method in the before hook. This way the code will be DRY compliant as well.
If these options doesn't work for you, one another way of forcing the order of execution is by using a batch/shell script. You can add individual cucumber commands for each feature in the order you would like to execute and then just execute the script. The downside of it is different reports will be generated for each feature file. But this is something that I wouldn't recommend for the reasons mentioned above.
From Justin Ko's website - https://jkotests.wordpress.com/2013/08/22/specify-execution-order-of-cucumber-features/ the run order is determined in the following way:
Alphabetically by feature file directory
Alphabetically by feature file name
Order of scenarios within the feature file
So to run one feature before the other you could change the name of the feature file or put it in a separate feature folder with a name that alphabetically first.
However, it is good practice to make all of your tests independent of one another. One of the easiest way to do this is to use mocks to create your data (i.e. the date you want to delete), but that isn't always an option. Another way would be to create the data you want to delete in the set up of the delete tests. The downside to doing this is that it's a duplication of effort, but it won't matter what order the tests run in. This may not be an issue now, but with a larger test suite and/or multiple coders using the test repo it may be difficult to maintain the test ordering based solely on alphabetical sorting.
Another option would be to combine the add and delete tests. This goes against the general rule that one test should test one thing but is often a pragmatic approach if your tests take a long time to run and adding the add data step to the set up for delete would add a lot of time to your test suite.
Edit: After reading that link to Justin Ko's site you can specify the features that are run when you run cucumber, and it will run them in the order that you give. For any that you don't care about the order for you can just put the whole feature folder at the end and cucumber will run through them, skipping any that have already been run. Copy paste example from the link above -
cucumber features\folder2\another.feature features\folder1\some.feature features
I want to be able to change my feature file from outside visual studio and have the updated feature file picked up, for subsequent test execution, without compilation of my test project. Is it possible to do this? Can someone help to specify the exact steps needed to do this? I am using MsTest.
Here are the steps I followed, but I get the message "No tests to execute." every time:
Change Test Project file (.csproj) as mentioned here
Build the Test DLL from Visual Studio
Kept the feature file in a folder FeatureFiles, under the Test release folder
Changed the feature file in Notepad
Used the Specflow generate all command, to regenerate the tests:
Specflow generateall TestProject.csproj /force /verbose
Create the report:
mstest /testcontainer:Test.Dll /resultsfile:TestResult.trx
A similar question was asked earlier, and I am following the same steps as mentioned by Marcus there.
Update
Here is what I would like to do. Considering the following .feature file:
Feature: Score Calculation
As a player
I want the system to calculate my total score
So that I know my performance
Scenario: Another beginners game
Given a new bowling game
When I roll the following series: 2,7,3,4,1,1,5,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,5,1
Then my total score should be 40
In the above feature file, I would like to change the data series of numbers and change the total score and run the same test again to check if it runs fine and I get a correct score
If you only want to change the data for a test, then go with a CSV file that you save inside your VS project. Then in a Given statement open that file, parse it and save it to the ScenarioContext.Current object for use in subsequent steps.
I can't see how what you want is possible. SpecFlow generates unit test classes from the feature file. These unit test classes MUST be compiled before they can be run, the same as ANY code change.
You are getting a 'no tests to execute' because you are still running against the old version of the dll, which doesn't contain any tests because you have not rebuilt it with the new code that specflow has generated.
From what is stated in the linked question it seems they are saying that some changes may be able to be run without recompiling, but honestly I cannot see how that is possible, and even if some feature file changes were possible I imagine that the solution would be specific to certain unit test frameworks and unsupported.
EDIT
When I look at the generated feature.cs file you have this:
[Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting.TestMethodAttribute()]
[Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting.DescriptionAttribute("Another beginners game")]
[Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting.TestPropertyAttribute("FeatureTitle", "Score Calculation")]
public virtual void AnotherBeginnersGame()
{
TechTalk.SpecFlow.ScenarioInfo scenarioInfo = new TechTalk.SpecFlow.ScenarioInfo("Another beginners game", ((string[])(null)));
#line 5
this.ScenarioSetup(scenarioInfo);
#line 6
testRunner.Given("a new bowling game", ((string)(null)), ((TechTalk.SpecFlow.Table)(null)), "Given ");
#line 7
testRunner.When("I roll the following series: 2,7,3,4,1,1,5,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,5,1", ((string)(null)), ((TechTalk.SpecFlow.Table)(null)), "When ");
#line 8
testRunner.Then("my total score should be 40", ((string)(null)), ((TechTalk.SpecFlow.Table)(null)), "Then ");
#line hidden
this.ScenarioCleanup();
}
As you can see this contains your actual list of values and expected result in the code
This surely implies that you can't change the feature file and have the test update without recompiling, as otherwise any changes to the cs file will not be reflected in the actual dll that you are running.
I am using Rstudio and not sure how options "run" and "source" are different.
I tried googling these terms but 'source' is a very common word and wasn't able to get good search results :(
Run and source have subtly different meanings. According to the RStudio documentation,
The difference between running lines from a selection and invoking
Source is that when running a selection all lines are inserted
directly into the console whereas for Source the file is saved to a
temporary location and then sourced into the console from there
(thereby creating less clutter in the console).
Something to be aware of, is that sourcing functions in files makes them available for scripts to use. What does this mean? Imagine you are trying to troubleshoot a function that is called from a script. You need to source the file containing the function, to make the changes available in the function be used when that line in the script is then run.
A further aspect of this is that you can source functions from your scripts. I use this code to automatically source all of the functions in a directory, which makes it easy to run a long script with a single run:
# source our functions
code.dir <- "c:\temp"
code.files = dir(code.dir, pattern = "[.r]")
for (file in code.files){
source(file = file.path(code.dir,file))
}
Sometimes, for reasons I don't understand, you will get different behavior depending on whether you select all the lines of code and press the run the button or go to code menu and chose 'source.' For example, in one specific case, writing a gplot to a png file worked when I selected all my lines of code but the write failed to when I went to the code menu and chose 'source.' However, if I choose 'Source with Echo,' I'm able to print to a png file again.
I'm simply reporting a difference here that I've seen between the selecting and running all your lines and code and going to code menu and choosing 'source,' at least in the case when trying to print a gplot to a png file.
An important implication of #AndyClifton's answer is:
Rstudio breakpoints work in source (Ctrl-Shift-S) but not in run (Ctrl-Enter)
Presumably the reason is that with run, the code is getting passed straight into the console with no support for a partial submission.
You can still use browser() though with run though.
print() to console is supported in debugSource (Ctrl-Shift-S) as well as run.
The "run" button simply executes the selected line or lines. The "source" button will execute the entire active document. But why not just try them and see the difference?
I also just discovered that the encoding used to read the function sourced can also be different if you source the file or if you add the function of the source file to your environment with Ctrl+Enter!
In my case there was a regex with a special character (µ) in my function. When I imported the function directly (Ctrl+Enter) everything would work, while I had an error when sourcing the file containing this function.
To solve this issue I specified the encoding of the sourced file in the source function (source("utils.R", encoding = "UTF-8")).
Run will run each line of code, which means that it hits enter at the beginning of each line, which prints the output to the console. Source won't print anything unless you source with echo, which means that ggplot won't print to pngs, as another posted mentioned.
A big practical difference between run and source is that if you get an unaccounted for error in source it'll break you out of the code without finishing, whereas run will just pass the next line to the console and keep going. This has been the main practical difference I've seen working on cleaning up other people's scripts.
When using RSTudio u can press the run button in the script section - it will run the selected line.
Next to it you have the re - run button, to run the line again. and the source button next to it will run entire chuncks of code.
I found a video about this topic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YmcEYTSN7k
Source/Source with echo is used to execute the whole file whereas Run as far as my personal experience goes executes the line in which your cursor is present.
Thus, Run helps you to debug your code. Watch out for the environment. It will display what's happening in the stack.
To those saying plots do not show. They won't show in Plots console. But you can definitely save the plot to disc using Source in RStudio. Using this snippet:
png(filename)
print(p)
dev.off()
I can confirm plots are written to disc. Furthermore print statements are also outputted to the console
I use Octopress for blogging. Generally it works well except one occassion -- after typing rake generate, I got depressing output which says something like:
psych.rb:203:in `parse': (<unknown>): mapping values are not allowed in this context at line 3 column 6 (Psych::SyntaxError)
I can't remember how many times I've encounterd this situation. Every time I google the key words above, but got nothing help.
What I can do is to exclude all the source files (*.mkd) from _posts, and add them one by one to check which one goes wrong. I keep checking, and finally it turns out that a minor grammer mistake makes octopress angry.
Life should NOT be that hard. So is it possible to debug a octopress source file to show which line of file is incorrect in grammer? The outputs from rake generate don't make sense at all.
The reason could be wrong JAML in the top part of the post (e.g. ':' in the title), see https://github.com/jekyll/jekyll/issues/549 for more info.
I've seen a similar error ("mapping values are not allowed in this context") when I try to convert markdown files, using Pandoc. Perhaps your error message is coming from pandoc somehow?
Don't bother to debug Octopress. Please migrate to Pelican -- a Python-powered static site generator. It is full-featured, easy to use, and no doubt, generating useful debug information.
I wrote a feature to test the default configuration of my web app using Cucumber and Capybara. Part of the feature looked like this:
And the page has a photo labeled "Device"
And the page has a checkbox labeled "Device"
And I check "Device"
And I submit the form
Then the resulting page has no photo labeled "Device"
It worked great. I want users who have installed and configured the web app on their own servers to be able to run the test to help confirm that their configuration is correct. And "Device" is a string in the default config file that the user can change. It's an element in an array and they can add to or remove from the array when configuring their instance of the app.
Is this a sensible use of the tools or am I abusing Cucumber and/or Capybara? If it's sensible, how would I do it? If it's a bad idea, what tools might I use for this instead, if anything?
Here's how I got it to work. I'm just not sure this is the best way to do it.
For this to work, the feature would have to look more like this:
And the page has at least 3 photos, let us call the last one "third_photo"
In the corresponding step definition, I use an XPath to pull out the corresponding label string for the first photo and assign it to a Hash object stored in a class variable.
And /^I the page has at least (\d*) photos, let us call the last one "([^\"]*)"$/ do |n, name|
if ! defined?(#note)
#note = Hash.new;
end
#note[name] = find(:xpath, '//ol[#id="menu"]/li[' +n+ ']/a').text;
end
Subsequent step definitions can now access the value, whatever it was.
So, another feature might be:
Then I uncheck "third_item"
And the corresponding step definition might be:
Then /I uncheck "([^\"]*)"/ do |item|
uncheck(#note[item])
end
But I don't feel good about it. If nothing else, I imagine there might be a name collision with another instance variable defined outside the step definitions.
It feels like I'm either Doing It Wrong or else I'm Using The Wrong Tool. What is the right way to do this?
Don't know what you are fishing after, but it feels like your tests and implementation are quite tightly coupled. Maybe that's the feeling you are having, that it seems like you are describing your app in tests.
I don't have a good answer to your questions, merely because I don't "understand" it. I would however urge you to try to decouple your tests from your implementation and see if there's any abstraction there waiting to be found.
There's a blog post about using instance variables in step definitions at http://www.cloudspace.com/blog/2010/06/23/using-instance-variables-with-cucumber-steps/.
Commenters talk about the coupling this entails and at least one possible way around it.
In particular, davetron5000 says:
What we do is to not use instance variables at all, but instead
provide a has that shared state can go in. This hash is cleared after
each test run. Not ideal, but it's a bit cleaner than random instance
variables all over the place (and also ensures a reasonably clean
state before each test)