I have created a simple activity in which I have 2 buttons for submitting and cancel. I just want to test this project by using UI Automator testing. So I create an android test project and make a class. I make this test class extend UiAutomatorTestCase. I have also added uiautomator.jar, android.jar as well as the junit3 library. But when I run the test case, it gives me an error about
TestSuiteConstruction failed and java.lang.RuntimeException.
However I add constructor but as it does not take any parameter, so I am unable to add any paramater. Here is my test case code. Please solve this error as soon as possible. Can you please tell me anything that I have not added in my project?
package com.example.automatorapp.test;
import android.test.suitebuilder.TestSuiteBuilder;
import android.util.Log;
import com.android.uiautomator.core.UiObjectNotFoundException;
import com.android.uiautomator.testrunner.UiAutomatorTestCase;
import com.example.automatorapp.MainActivity;
public class testDemo1 extends UiAutomatorTestCase
{
public testDemo1()
{
}
public void testdemo() throws UiObjectNotFoundException
{
getUiDevice().pressHome();
Log.e("how r u","hello");
}
}
Try changing the name of your class so that is does not start with 'test' and remove the constructor. By convention, the name of a class starts with a Capital letter, yours starts with the lowercase 't'. Also, again by convention, JUnit3 test classes put the word 'Test' at the end. http://junit.sourceforge.net/junit3.8.1/javadoc/junit/framework/TestCase.html So in your example a class name of testdemo1 would be something line Demo1Test (remember the filename needs to match the classname).
However, and to my surprise, a slightly modified version of your code ran on my machine. Here's the code that ran OK.
package com.example.automatorapp.test;
import android.util.Log;
import com.android.uiautomator.core.UiObjectNotFoundException;
import com.android.uiautomator.testrunner.UiAutomatorTestCase;
public class testDemo1 extends UiAutomatorTestCase
{
public testDemo1()
{
}
public void testdemo() throws UiObjectNotFoundException
{
getUiDevice().pressHome();
Log.e("how r u","hello");
}
}
I got the Log message in the Android log too.
E/how r u (24667): hello
Therefore, you may have some issues with your project setup or build environment. As far as I know this project (for testing) should be independent of the code or project for the app you want to test. However you have an import to the app you want to test.
import com.example.automatorapp.MainActivity;
As you've now posted quite a few questions related to UI Automator perhaps you could summarise your progress so far. For example, have you ever got a UI Automator test to run successfully?
PS: I hoped to see some feedback to answers to your earlier questions. Without your feedback it's hard to know which way you're heading and whether the answers were relevant or useful to you.
Related
I have written the following annotation:
import java.lang.annotation.ElementType;
import java.lang.annotation.Retention;
import java.lang.annotation.RetentionPolicy;
import java.lang.annotation.Target;
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.SOURCE)
#Target({ElementType.METHOD})
public #interface Warning {
}
Which is intended to annotate methods which can cause problems if called carelessly. I added an annotation processor to my project, but this only provides the warning in the log output of the javac command. I want this warning to appear in Android Studio along with the other lint warnings anywhere a method with this annotation is called. This is why I am trying to write a custom lint rule. I have the basic skeleton of the lint rule:
import com.android.tools.lint.detector.api.Category;
import com.android.tools.lint.detector.api.Detector;
import com.android.tools.lint.detector.api.Implementation;
import com.android.tools.lint.detector.api.Issue;
import com.android.tools.lint.detector.api.Scope;
import com.android.tools.lint.detector.api.Severity;
public class CaimitoDetector extends Detector implements Detector.JavaScanner {
public static final Issue ISSUE = Issue.create(
"WarningAnnotation",
"This method has been annotated with #Warning",
"This method has special conditions surrounding it's use, be careful when using it and refer to its documentation.",
Category.USABILITY, 7, Severity.WARNING,
new Implementation(CaimitoDetector.class, Scope.JAVA_FILE_SCOPE));
#Override
public void visitMethod(JavaContext context, AstVisitor visitor, MethodInvocation node) {
}
}
import com.android.tools.lint.client.api.IssueRegistry;
import com.android.tools.lint.detector.api.Issue;
import java.util.Collections;
import java.util.List;
public class CaimitoIssueRegistry extends IssueRegistry {
#Override
public List<Issue> getIssues() {
return Collections.singletonList(CaimitoDetector.ISSUE);
}
}
But I do not know how to proceed from here. How can I check if an annoation exists on a method, and raise a warning such that it will be visible in Android Studio?
But I do not know how to proceed from here
I suggest to write a test for your Detector first. Here is an example project which demonstrates how to write Detector tests [1]. That way you can try and adjust your Detector as you like.
How can I check if an annoation exists on a method
I suggest to have a look at Android's default detectors [2]. There you'll most probably find a good point to start. E.g. the AnnotationDetector.
and raise a warning such that it will be visible in Android Studio?
If you integrate your custom rules correctly into your project, then Lint will raise the warning for you. Please have a look here [3] for different options on how to integrate custom rules in your project. Note: AFAIK warnings of custom rules will only reported when running the corresponding Gradle task. The "auto-highlight" of Android Studio does not work with custom rules.
https://github.com/a11n/CustomLintRules
https://android.googlesource.com/platform/tools/base/+/master/lint/libs/lint-checks/src/main/java/com/android/tools/lint/checks
https://github.com/a11n/android-lint/tree/master/6_application
The follows was the code which I want to test.
public class Demo {
private static final List<Pair<String, String>> mList;
static {
mList = new ArrayList<>();
mList.add(new Pair<>("F0", "T1"));
mList.add(new Pair<>("F1", "T2"));
mList.add(new Pair<>("F2", "T3"));
}
public String getStr(int pos) {
return mList.get(pos).first;
}
}
I was an android developer. I have get some trouble in test and mock the code.I have use mockito.
I have try some code to test it,but the result was not my expect.
1.First try
#Test
public void test(){
Demo demo=new Demo();
assertEquals(demo.getStr(0),"F0");
/**
* java.lang.AssertionError:
* Expected :null
* Actual :F0
*/
}
2.Second try
#Test
public void test() {
Demo demo = mock(Demo.class);
doCallRealMethod().when(demo).getStr(0);
assertEquals(demo.getStr(0), "F0");
/**
* java.lang.AssertionError:
* Expected :null
* Actual :F0
*/
}
Anyone tell me how can I resolve this problem to make demo.getStr(0) == "F0" by call the real method? Thanks!
===========================
Another question relate to it
I have try an another test to test android.util.Pair class, and the result is that "pair.first" was null,.(There are androidTest and test directory,I put it into test package.Did it impact the result?)
import android.util.Pair;
import org.junit.Test;
import org.mockito.Mockito;
import static org.junit.Assert.assertEquals;
public class DemoTest {
#Test
public void test1(){
Pair<String,String> pair=new Pair("First","Second");
assertEquals("First",pair.first);
//pair.first was null,why?
}
#Test
public void test2(){
Pair<String,String> pair= Mockito.spy(Pair.class);
assertEquals("First",pair.first);
//pair.first was null also,why?
}
}
Why the simple code is correct in real android environment,but failure in test?
I had the same problem too. month ago I have problem with TextUtils class too.
I report this to jUnit but they told me the problem is with android package because in unit test environment you don't have access to platform specific classes
for that pair case you can use this package. this works for me
import android.support.v4.util.Pair;
The problem in your first try is, that the public field "first" is actually null.
Is the Pair class the one from the "javafx.util" package or a custom implementation?
Did you forget "this.first = first" or something similar in the constructor of the "Pair" class?
I would also recommend to change the following line:
assertEquals(demo.getStr(0),"F0");
to
assertEquals("F0", demo.getStr(0));
so that the error is printed correctly.
Your second try does not make any sense. What is the point in mocking the class you want to test?
I think the second example has the same problem as the first one. Pair.first is never set. If you fix that, it should also work (untested).
From Google's Android tools website:
"Method ... not mocked."
The android.jar file that is used to run unit tests does not contain any actual code - that is provided by the Android system image on real devices. Instead, all methods throw exceptions (by default). This is to make sure your unit tests only test your code and do not depend on any particular behaviour of the Android platform (that you have not explicitly mocked e.g. using Mockito).
So how can we solve this?
In other words. If you need a default android class to work properly you either have to include it from a separate repository, or implement it yourself.
In the case of Android's Pair class. You can use android.support.v4.util.Pair instead.
To get access to this class, you can include com.android.support:support-compat:27.0.0 in your build.gradle or dependencies file.
If you are not using Gradle, you can copy the implementation of this file and use it in place of the official one. Or you can try and download the .jar file from this older version https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/com.google.android/support-v4/r7 (I have not tested whether it works)
Another approach (based on this) is to create the class in app/src/test/java/android/util/Pair.java and copy the code from the Android implementation.
This way you don't need extra dependencies. (There may be issues related to the implementation changing after you make the copy, but the dependencies may become stale as well.)
I have a AIDL file that implemented in the package under ProjectA, and I am trying to import a Parcelable class (Foo) from another package under ProjectB. Below is the way how I implemented the MyService.AIDL file:
package com.packageA.projectA
import com.packageB.projectB.Foo
interface MyService{
void getSomething(Foo foo);
}
However, I get this compilation error "couldn't find import for class com.example.projectB.Foo". If I copied the packageB to packageA, then I will get no compilation error.
Is there a way to import parcelable class from package under different project? I know there're multiple questions on stackoverflow and elsewhere (like google group) about importing parcelable under the same project, but none from different projects. Thank you for your time.
You mean to say that you defined the class for the parcelable class and you are not able to use that class in the aidl ?
Try the below solution.
you have your MyService.AIDL in your src/xxx path.
Now create Foo.aidl (name should be same)in the same path and define that Foo.aidl as below.
package com.packageB.projectB
parcelable Foo
now remove the import statement from MyService.AIDL and re-type it (its for refreshing , else it will show same error)
now that import error must be gone.
I know this is old but I had the same problem and found the solution very ugly.
I had two classes defined in the package:
com.lni.codephg.inter
I had another class defined in the package
com.pcha.androidbtmanager
The actual AIDL interfaces were defined in the package
com.pcha.proprietary.handler
The client would be looking for remote services implementing methods in the package com.pcha.proprietary.handler.
So what did my AIDL file hierarchy have to look like to make this work?
src\main\aidl\com\lni\codephg\inter
MetricIntermediary.aidl
MdsIntermediary.aidl
src\main\aidl\com\pcha\androidbtmanager
PhdInformation.aidl
src\main\aidl\com\pcha\proprietary\handler
IConnectionCallback.aidl
IIntermediaryCallback.aidl
IProprietaryDeviceHandler.aidl
IStatusEventCallback.aidl
The 'one-liner' files defining the custom classes like MdsIntermediary.aidl look like this
// MdsIntermediary.aidl
package com.lni.codephg.inter;
parcelable MetricIntermediary;
I have to admit I do understand why these one-liner files must exist in such a weird form.
Then the interface AIDL files that reference them (for example IIntermediaryCallback.aidl) look like this
// IIntermediaryCallback.aidl
package com.pcha.proprietary.handler;
// Declare any non-default types here with import statements
import com.lni.codephg.inter.MdsIntermediary;
import com.lni.codephg.inter.MetricIntermediary;
interface IIntermediaryCallback
{
void onMdsIntermediary(in MdsIntermediary mds);
void onReceiveMetricIntermediaries (in List<MetricIntermediary> metricList, in
MdsIntermediary mds);
}
Of course I had to implement the Parcelable methods on the said custom classes. However, as ugly as that was, Android Studio seemed to do it for me. Since I know nothing about Parcelable I don't know if it is good enough or if I have to do some massaging.
This was painfully difficult. Hope this will save someone hours of frustration.
I'm trying to do Android unit testing for the first tme and I encounter a problem I can't seem to solve : only one of my test classes is ran, I'm not able to run test classes related to Activity testing, and even asserting true=false in them doesn't display an error.
My testing project is composed of three source files :
A test file for a class in my project (subclass of AndroidTestCase)
A test file for my first activity, LoginActivity (subclass of ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2)
A test file for another activity, EditUserActivity (once again subclass of ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2)
I used the following tutorial : http://forum.frandroid.com/topic/13831-traduc-de-tuto-les-tests-unitaires/ (in French but the code is in English)
And first read the following answer on StackOverflow : Trying to run Android JUnit tests in Eclipse fails? however it doesn't seems to be my problem
The code for the last test class is the following :
package com.imci.ica.test;
import com.imci.ica.EditUserActivity;
import android.test.ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2;
public class EditUserActivityTest extends
ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2<EditUserActivity> {
EditUserActivity mActivity;
public EditUserActivityTest() {
super("com.imci.ica", EditUserActivity.class);
}
#Override
protected void setUp() throws Exception {
super.setUp();
mActivity = this.getActivity();
}
public void testTest() {
assertEquals(true, false);
}
}
Thanks in advance for your help!
I don't understand why, but I had to move the Eclipse project's files, so I closed the project, moved them and imported the project back, and now all the tests are checked, so my problem's fixed. If it can help somebody...
For me, I found that one testing class was crashing. I forgot to added non-argument constructor. Fixing that, all tests are run.
I have written two test cases in a package com.app.myapp.test
When I try to run them both of them are not getting executed, only one test case gets executed and stops.
I have written the following testsuite in the same package
AllTests.java
public class AllTests extends TestSuite {
public static Test suite() {
return new TestSuiteBuilder(AllTests.class).includePackages("./src/com.ni.mypaint.test","./src/com.ni.mpaint.test").build();
/* .includeAllPackagesUnderHere()
.build();*/
}
Is the code and location for this testsuite is correct?
Well, certainly leave off the '/src/' portion of the package listing for that invocation. Either way, the easiest and most flexible way to run your tests this is to make sure all your tests are in a subpackage of where AllTests is (e.g. com.app.myapp.test.tests) and use this for the suite:
public static Test suite() {
return new TestSuiteBuilder(AllTests.class)
.includeAllPackagesUnderHere().build();
}
Make sure your tests run individually, too, without the suite runner -- the suite won't pick up your tests if they're set up wrong to begin with.
(This is better than explicitly listing the package name since it's more portable -- you can rename your test package without breaking it, for example.)