[U2] Mocking UniSession in .NET
Hi Does anybody know how to mock UniSession via .NET? or is there a interface for UniSession like IUniSession so it could be easily mockable? Your Help is very much appreciated Thanks Ravi ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Mocking UniSession in .NET
> From: Ravindranath > Does anybody know how to mock UniSession via .NET? or is there a > interface for UniSession like IUniSession so it could be easily mockable? If you don't get an answer here that you can use, look into JustMock from Telerik. I haven't used it against UniSession yet (I generally to use and sell mv.NET) but I'd expect it to do the job. HTH T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Mocking UniSession in .NET
would it be better to construct a higher level wrapper for your business functions and mock those? the UO libraries are quite low level: its a bit like mocking ado.net rather than your db calls. I expose all the business logic through server side subroutines, all using standardized calling conventions, then they can easily be simulated and also I can use server side unit tests. Sent from my iPad On 13 Aug 2012, at 19:32, "Ravindranath Wickramanayake" wrote: > Hi > > > > Does anybody know how to mock UniSession via .NET? or is there a > interface for UniSession like IUniSession so it could be easily > mockable? > > > > Your Help is very much appreciated > > > > Thanks > > Ravi > > ___ > U2-Users mailing list > U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org > http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Mocking UniSession in .NET
Thanks for the reply. I am trying to do higher level wrappers to hide
those UniObject stuff but the problem is in order to to get UniDynArray
it has to have UniSession. UniObjects allow me to send UniDynArray to
subroutine. Would you happen to have a sample code where you do
something like that. My code is as follow my prob is UniDynArray
GetData { get; } line. Code as bellow
#region GetDataByField
string GetDataByField(int field);
string GetDataByField(int field, int value);
string GetDataByField(int field, int value, int subValue);
#endregion
#region Count
int Count(int field);
int Count(int field, int value);
int Count(int field, int value, int subValue);
#endregion
#region Insert
void Insert(int field, string strValue);
void Insert(int field, int value, string strValue);
void Insert(int field, int value, int subValue, string
strValue);
#endregion
#region GetData
UniDynArray GetData { get; }
#endregion
-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Brian Leach
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 3:50 PM
To: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] Mocking UniSession in .NET
would it be better to construct a higher level wrapper for your business
functions and mock those? the UO libraries are quite low level: its a
bit like mocking ado.net rather than your db calls.
I expose all the business logic through server side subroutines, all
using standardized calling conventions, then they can easily be
simulated and also I can use server side unit tests.
Sent from my iPad
On 13 Aug 2012, at 19:32, "Ravindranath Wickramanayake"
wrote:
> Hi
>
>
>
> Does anybody know how to mock UniSession via .NET? or is there a
> interface for UniSession like IUniSession so it could be easily
> mockable?
>
>
>
> Your Help is very much appreciated
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Ravi
>
> ___
> U2-Users mailing list
> U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Mocking UniSession in .NET
> Brian Leach > would it be better to construct a higher level wrapper for your business > functions and mock those? the UO libraries are quite low level: its a bit > like mocking ado.net rather than your db calls. > From: Ravindranath > Thanks for the reply. I am trying to do higher level wrappers to hide > those UniObject stuff but the problem is in order to to get UniDynArray it > has to have UniSession. [snip] Brian, I was going to suggest the same thing. But this is one of the differences between unit testing an application and mocking, which will allow a unit test to run completely in test mode without actually calling to the server within the application code. Ravi could abstract his code out for the test but that very process could be considered an invalidation of the test. Despite the latest craze around unit testing and the entire industry that it's spawned, I still find applications I use to be as crappy as they've always been, so I'm not as enamored with unit tests or mocking as many others. When working on a GUI project I try to get the BASIC app developers to handle everything there while I intentionally remain ignorant of their inner processes. Once my clients get the hang of this they really enjoy the process - the BASIC developers regain their sense of self-confidence as they realize that a GUI doesn't threaten their jobs. We interface through well-defined BASIC calls. It's here that we can do a BASIC mockup of the input to their BASIC code. If that works, and I've done my job, the GUI will work when linked to the back-end. Similarly, and (Zzz...) here's the point, my GUI-side tests don't connect into the DBMS, so I don't need to mock that part. I keep that interface lightweight, use the same component for almost all DBMS activity, and don't need the overhead of unit tests or mocking for every new application. Ravi, that might be of some help to you. Good luck, T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
[U2] Fwd: Re: Mocking UniSession in .NET
G-Man: "Despite the latest craze around unit testing and the entire industry that it's spawned, I still find applications I use to be as crappy as they've always been, so I'm not as enamored with unit tests or mocking as many others. " ...maybe even more so! :-) You'd think developers these days would have something better to do with their time, but then, you've got to do what you've got to do. :-) [sigh...] Bill Original Message Subject:Re: [U2] Mocking UniSession in .NET Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 17:28:32 -0700 From: Tony Gravagno <3xk547...@sneakemail.com> Reply-To: U2 Users List To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org Brian Leach would it be better to construct a higher level wrapper for your business functions and mock those? the UO libraries are quite low level: its a bit like mocking ado.net rather than your db calls. From: Ravindranath Thanks for the reply. I am trying to do higher level wrappers to hide those UniObject stuff but the problem is in order to to get UniDynArray it has to have UniSession. [snip] Brian, I was going to suggest the same thing. But this is one of the differences between unit testing an application and mocking, which will allow a unit test to run completely in test mode without actually calling to the server within the application code. Ravi could abstract his code out for the test but that very process could be considered an invalidation of the test. Despite the latest craze around unit testing and the entire industry that it's spawned, I still find applications I use to be as crappy as they've always been, so I'm not as enamored with unit tests or mocking as many others. When working on a GUI project I try to get the BASIC app developers to handle everything there while I intentionally remain ignorant of their inner processes. Once my clients get the hang of this they really enjoy the process - the BASIC developers regain their sense of self-confidence as they realize that a GUI doesn't threaten their jobs. We interface through well-defined BASIC calls. It's here that we can do a BASIC mockup of the input to their BASIC code. If that works, and I've done my job, the GUI will work when linked to the back-end. Similarly, and (Zzz...) here's the point, my GUI-side tests don't connect into the DBMS, so I don't need to mock that part. I keep that interface lightweight, use the same component for almost all DBMS activity, and don't need the overhead of unit tests or mocking for every new application. Ravi, that might be of some help to you. Good luck, T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] Fwd: Re: Mocking UniSession in .NET
Well consider the situation where the programmer doesn't actually have their own instance of UniObjects at all, and is only trying to test some external unit. -Original Message- From: Bill Haskett To: U2 Mail List Sent: Mon, Aug 13, 2012 6:25 pm Subject: [U2] Fwd: Re: Mocking UniSession in .NET G-Man: "Despite the latest craze around unit testing and the entire industry that it's spawned, I still find applications I use to be as crappy as they've always been, so I'm not as enamored with unit tests or mocking as many others. " ...maybe even more so! :-) You'd think developers these days would have something better to do with their time, but then, you've got to do what you've got to do. :-) [sigh...] Bill Original Message Subject:Re: [U2] Mocking UniSession in .NET Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 17:28:32 -0700 From: Tony Gravagno <3xk547...@sneakemail.com> Reply-To: U2 Users List To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org > Brian Leach > would it be better to construct a higher level wrapper for your business > functions and mock those? the UO libraries are quite low level: its a bit > like mocking ado.net rather than your db calls. > From: Ravindranath > Thanks for the reply. I am trying to do higher level wrappers to hide > those UniObject stuff but the problem is in order to to get UniDynArray it > has to have UniSession. [snip] Brian, I was going to suggest the same thing. But this is one of the differences between unit testing an application and mocking, which will allow a unit test to run completely in test mode without actually calling to the server within the application code. Ravi could abstract his code out for the test but that very process could be considered an invalidation of the test. Despite the latest craze around unit testing and the entire industry that it's spawned, I still find applications I use to be as crappy as they've always been, so I'm not as enamored with unit tests or mocking as many others. When working on a GUI project I try to get the BASIC app developers to handle everything there while I intentionally remain ignorant of their inner processes. Once my clients get the hang of this they really enjoy the process - the BASIC developers regain their sense of self-confidence as they realize that a GUI doesn't threaten their jobs. We interface through well-defined BASIC calls. It's here that we can do a BASIC mockup of the input to their BASIC code. If that works, and I've done my job, the GUI will work when linked to the back-end. Similarly, and (Zzz...) here's the point, my GUI-side tests don't connect into the DBMS, so I don't need to mock that part. I keep that interface lightweight, use the same component for almost all DBMS activity, and don't need the overhead of unit tests or mocking for every new application. Ravi, that might be of some help to you. Good luck, T ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
[U2] [OT] Opportunity for non-MV techie to learn MV in Atlanta, GA
I am not the one with the details but can put you in touch with the one who does. I can say that no MV experience is required. The database is UniVerse with OHM software. The company will train. Good beginning salary for interested candidate. We could certainly use new blood in our niche. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/-OT--Opportunity-for-non-MV-techie-to-learn-MV-in-Atlanta%2C-GA-tp34294905p34294905.html Sent from the U2 - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Re: [U2] [OT] Opportunity for non-MV techie to learn MV in Atlanta, GA
Please email me directly with the details. We'll see what we can do for them. Thanks. Robert On 8/13/2012 8:03 PM, BruceHolt wrote: I am not the one with the details but can put you in touch with the one who does. I can say that no MV experience is required. The database is UniVerse with OHM software. The company will train. Good beginning salary for interested candidate. We could certainly use new blood in our niche. ___ U2-Users mailing list U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
