Toad World® Forums

Code Tester first impressions and some desiderata: dialog w/ SF


#1

Some other comments since this is my first week with Code Tester. (I

have a few months of experience with utPLSQL.):

  1. The “… single-byte character set …” has already become a nag and it is desirable to turn it off. I trust this limitation lies in the same category as others such as timestamp with time zone, interval etc. I.e. I can work around it for the limited situations where it hurts.

  2. From the dashboard I continually use “Append test case…” (or ctrl-B) even when I am “editing” not appending. Should it be “Edit…”?

  3. Most of my test case names are mindless. A nice configurable feature would be for the and text to be instead, the subprogram name followed by an underscore <#>. E.g. DAY_IN_DST_<#>.

  4. The user flow for "Content of " isn’t smooth for me. I would default to the “Single value …” rather than null. I would split “Single value or expression” into two items – the “Evaluate as an expression” check box is a nuisance.

  5. With utPLSQL I frequently am using the technique of the following snippet to avoid teardown so that I may inspect the final state (My setup calls my teardown. Also I have to do a prior utPLSQL init and run test for this to work.):

exec ut_MDMS_632.ut_setup;

exec ut_MDMS_632.ut_MDMS_632;

Is there a means to turn off teardown with Code Tester?

  1. Displaying the SID would be helpful (configured off by default).

  2. In addition to unit tests of APIs I have been developing test cases in response to defects. Typically these test cases are not against an API but rather they are against a multi-step process. In such cases, using utPLSQL, I have been developing stub test target package specs and bodies with no methods. In order to get Code Tester to engage in such a scenario I had to create a stub subprogram – a no method package yields “The selected program has no executable subprograms …” Opportunity lies here somewhere!

  3. I haven’t yet discovered what the test case “Set” column (following Status and Name) means.

In general, I see the opportunity to expand Code Tester beyond unit test and into the subsystem test (string test) and simulation realm. I have no desire for multiple frameworks when the repository, dashboard and standardized assertions are already extant in Code Tester.

Thank you,

Kevin

break (8) by kdavis

Message was edited by: kdavis


#2

Kevin,

OK, whew, a few minutes to craft a response:

  1. Yes…we are tweaking this to both make sure the message only appears when necessary. Hopefully for 1.6 (June) - and we will be issuing the beta version for general access very soon.

  2. Fixed in 1.6.

  3. Great idea! I will put this request in, probably not available till 1.7 though (the fall).

  4. I agree. It is clumsy and awkward. We are fixing some things in 1.6, but hopefully can clean it up further in 1.7.

  5. There is no way currently to disable teardown, but teardown by default is empty, does nothing. So if you don’t want teardown to tear anything down, just leave it empty. Or am I missing something?

  6. Where would you want to display the SID?

7 (and the concluding paragraph). Yes, we need to and plan to make Quest Code Tester a bit more flexible, not require a stored program unit from which you build your test. I hope that someday Code Tester can be a universal framework for all sorts of testing. Patience, patience!

  1. “Set” column: I am sorry, but I do not follow. Can you be more explicit (maybe a screen shot?) about what you refer to hear?

#3

Regarding question number 3

An even more nice feature would be that the text that appears as a comment in the tabs description, declarations, subprograms, initialization and cleanup is configurtable with a default value that appears every time you create a new test.


#4

Thanks, I will add this to our list, though we are likely going to get rid of those placeholder comments altogether, soon…

SF