We Keep Coding

Integration tests with asp.net core (test of controllers without the views)

I am trying to setup a test project to test my controllers with identity and the database without having to define the views.
I have a unit test project where I can test my controller by instanciating it, passing the dbContext to the constructor.
public class EventControllerTests
{
private readonly IEventRepository _eventRepository;
private readonly EventController _controller;
private readonly AppDbContext dbContext;
const string cn = "Data Source=(localdb)\\MSSQLLocalDB;Initial Catalog=EventDb;Integrated Security=True;Connect Timeout=30;Encrypt=False;TrustServerCertificate=False;ApplicationIntent=ReadWrite;MultiSubnetFailover=False";
public EventControllerTests()
{
var options = new DbContextOptionsBuilder<EVNTS.Web.Database.AppDbContext>()
.UseSqlServer(cn).Options;
dbContext = new EVNTS.Web.Database.AppDbContext(options);
// Arrange
_eventRepository = new EventRepository(dbContext);
_controller = new EVNTS.Web.Controllers.EventController(_eventRepository);
}
[Fact]
public void ActionIndexTest()
{
// Act
var result = _controller.Index(1);
// Assert
var model = (Event)result.Model;
Assert.Equal(1, model.Id);
}
}
I have an integration test project where I use a WebApplicationFactory
public class BasicTests : IClassFixture<WebApplicationFactory<EVNTS.Startup>>
{
private readonly WebApplicationFactory<EVNTS.Startup> _factory;
private readonly HttpClient _client;
public BasicTests(WebApplicationFactory<EVNTS.Startup> factory)
{
_factory = factory;
_client = _factory.CreateClient();
}
[Theory]
[InlineData("/")]
public async Task Get_EndpointsReturnSuccessAndCorrectContentType(string url)
{
// Act
var response = await _client.GetAsync(url);
// Assert
response.EnsureSuccessStatusCode(); // Status Code 200-299
Assert.Equal("text/html; charset=utf-8",
response.Content.Headers.ContentType.ToString());
}
[Fact]
public async Task TestUserRegistration()
{
var s = _factory.Services.GetRequiredService<EVNTS.Web.Repositories.IEventRepository>();
var url = "/user/register";
var inputModel = new EVNTS.Web.ViewModels.RegisterModel()
{
UserName = "eric",
Password = "123456",
ConfirmPassword = "123456"
};
var sObj = JsonSerializer.Serialize(inputModel);
var content = new StringContent(sObj, Encoding.UTF8, "application/json");
content.Headers.ContentType = new MediaTypeHeaderValue("application/json");
var response = await _client.PostAsync(url, content);
var result = response.Content.ReadAsStringAsync();
}
}
The problem is that with the second option, the views have to be created and I need to use a library like AngleSharp to test the results.
I would like something in between where I can call the contructor directly and test the result view but with the DI injecting the UserManager and the dbContext for me.
any ideas?
Cheers
Here is the controller:
public class UserController : Controller
{
private readonly UserManager<User> _userManager;
public UserController(UserManager<User> userManager)
{
_userManager = userManager;
}
[HttpPost]
public async Task<IActionResult> Register([FromBody] RegisterModel model)
{
IdentityResult? result=null;
if (ModelState.IsValid)
{
var user = await _userManager.FindByNameAsync(model.UserName);
if (user == null)
{
user = new User
{
Id = Guid.NewGuid(),
UserName = model.UserName,
};
result = await _userManager.CreateAsync(user, model.Password);
}
}
return View(result);
}
}

I also find this usefull sometimes when you want to check the result of a controller in an integration test condition without checking the view.
You can use the dependency injection and create a scope from the WebApplicationFactory.
using (var serviceScope = Factory.Services.CreateScope())
{
var sut= serviceScope.ServiceProvider.GetService<YourController>();
}
To make this work you have to call the method AddControllersAsServices() in Startup.cs to register the controller in the DI container
services.AddControllersWithViews(options => { options.ConfigureMvcOptionsForPortalModule(); })
.SetCompatibilityVersion(CompatibilityVersion.Version_3_0)
.AddControllersAsServices();//add controller in DI to access it in integration testing

There is no in between. The first example is a unit test, while the second is an integration test. If you want to just look at the result object of the action, then you'd use the unit test methodology, and you'd need to mock out your dependencies. Otherwise, you'd use the integration test approach, and you have to deal with the actual simulated server response.
For what it's worth here, controller actions should be integration tested, since they are inherently dependent on a number of components coming together, so you should be following the second approach, parsing the HTML response, if necessary.

I don't consider myself an authority on how to perform unit testing, but since the comment section is restricted in characters I will write my comments here.
Usually, when you find yourself in a situation where it's difficult to come up with a good unit test (I won't define "good" here) more often than not, it is because there are some problems with the project structure/code design, and not actual limitations of the unit testing itself (again, not that unit testing doesn't have it's limitations, but I think this is not the case here).
Based on the above I asked you to include the action's code so we can examine what exactly are you trying to test and why it is so hard.
Here comes the heavily opinion-based part of my comment, but I leave it up to you wether you would want to take some of this or leave it.
It's not a rule, but a good rule of thumb is that the controller should contain very little business logic, which means that unit testing a controller should be basically testing the different paths that the request could go, once it hits the controller.
Generally you would want something like this:
if (!ModelState.IsValid)
{
return BadRequest(ModelState);
}
var user = await _userManager.FindByNameAsync(model.UserName);
...
return View(result);
which then you can unit test with something like this:
public async Task Register_Returns_BadRequest_On_Invalid_Model()
{
var testUsername = "TestUsername";
var mockUserManager = new Mock<IUserManager>();
mockUserManager.Setup(m => m.FindByNameAsync(testUsername))
.Returns(Task.FromResult(**Not sure about this part**))
var controller = new RegisterController(mockUserManager.Object);
var result = await controller.Register(model: null);
var actionResult = Assert.IsType<ActionResult<IdentityResult>>(result);
Assert.IsType<BadRequestObjectResult>(actionResult.Result);
}
For the happy path you want only to check that on a valid ModelState the result is of type ActionResult>
What is my idea:
When you unit test the controller you should not be bothered by the actual data, this is responsibility of other parts of the application
The controller unit test should be plain simple, most of the time you should be testing only those two cases - invalid data returns some sort of BadRequest, valid data returns the expected response
If you find yourself mocking too much objects most of the time it's a clear sign that you need some additional layer of abstraction.
In your case, in order to make my code better structured and easier for testing I would do the following:
First test for invalid ModelState - you don't want to proceed if the ModelState is invalid and this should also be covered by an unit test.
Managers should be a higher level of abstraction. Methods like FindByNameAsync and CreateAsync are more suitable for the data access layer. In the case of this action, your UserManager can have a method like Register so your controller's action look like this:
if (!ModelState.IsValid)
{
return BadRequest()
}
var result = _userManager.Register(model.UserName);
return View(result);
Now you can remove the Find and Create methods from the controller and create a UserRepository where I thin those methods belong and where you can test them in isolation.
In this setup You have these abstractions Controller -> Manager -> Repository. Now you try to test the three of these in one single method, which is causing the problems in my opinion.
Also, just because I find this a bit more tidy, usually you use a Service layer and if the structure is too complex you add the manager layer so it becomes Controller -> Manager -> Service -> Repository. In your case I'm not sure that you need this complexity so maybe just for the sake of better naming, rename the UserManager to UserService, so that your code flow is Controller -> Service -> Repository.
Also, last pease of advice. Controller testing has always been contraversial so don't be too bothered if you don't cover your controller with unit tests as much as other parts of the code. This is somewhat expected, what I wanted to tell with this post is mainly that the problem wasn't how to test but rather is the code testable as it is, which in my opinion could be improved as I've shown above. Yes, my proposition is not perfect as well but it creates smaller chunks of code which are encapsulated, don't have that many dependencies which ultimately makes them easier to test. And of course this is not a substitution of the integrations tests.
Hope this gave you some food for thought.

The following constructor parameters did not have matching fixture data

I'm trying to test my controllers using xUnit but getting the following error during execution of Customer Controller:
"The following constructor parameters did not have matching fixture
data: CustomerController customerController"
Test Class
public class UnitTest1
{
CustomerController _customerController;
public UnitTest1(CustomerController customerController)
{
_customerController = customerController;
}
[Fact]
public void PostTestSuccessful()
{
Guid guid = Guid.NewGuid();
CustomerViewModel model = new CustomerViewModel()
{
Id = guid,
Name = "testName",
Email = "test email",
PhoneNumber = "test phone",
Address = "test address",
City = "test city",
Gender = "Male"
};
var actionResult = _customerController.Post(model);
Assert.NotNull(actionResult);
Assert.IsType<Task<IActionResult>>(actionResult);
Assert.True(actionResult.IsCompletedSuccessfully);
}
CustomerController Class
[Route("customers")]
public class CustomerController : ControllerBase
{
private readonly ILogger _logger;
private readonly ICustomerService _customerService;
public CustomerController(ILogger<CustomerController> logger,
ICustomerService customerService)
{
_logger = logger;
_customerService = customerService;
}
[HttpPost]
public async Task<IActionResult> Post([FromBody] CustomerViewModel viewModel)
{
var customerToBeSaved = viewModel.Adapt<CustomerServiceModel>();
var customer = await _customerService.SaveAsync(customerToBeSaved);
var result = customer.Adapt<CustomerViewModel>();
return Ok(result);
}

What you are missing is the IClassFixture interface for the test class. This will fix the problem...
public class UnitTest1 : IClassFixture<CustomerController>

Just new up CustomerController in the constructor, if you don't want to use any mocking framework.

This article shows how to get xunit working with .Net Core ASP.Net really well. It actually replaces the startup so that your controllers run in the same process, and you can test them as if they were local.
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/test/integration-tests
It allows your standard .Net Dependency Injection to work as it normally does. Moreover it has the amazing benefit of not running as a server, and it fakes the whole startup process so that it runs in one single process and you can debug all the way through. This is also the way you should do it because Microsoft says so.
There's more help to be gleaned from the forum at the bottom of the article.

For the testing framework, you need the mocking library to inject a mock object through DI in your testing classes. You can use Nmock, Moq or any other mocking library to setup the constructor injection.
https://www.c-sharpcorner.com/uploadfile/john_charles/mocking-in-net-with-moq/
http://nmock.sourceforge.net/quickstart.html

Your Test Class Need to Inject ILogger and ICustomerService in Constructor
I Suggest you to Use Mock and Inject Controller Constructor Inputs in Test Class with Mocking
But Don't forget to Set Up the Mocked Objects or Interfaces
Learn More About Mock Here.....enter link description here

Unable to load config in class library project in nunit unit test c# [duplicate]

I am working in an ASP.net MVC 5 application. I would like to Unit Test my controller action which looks like this
public ActionResult Search()
{
var vm = SetupSearchViewModel();
return View(vm);
}
All the hard work is done by the SetupSearchViewModel() method, which itself is an orchestrator calling many different other methods, one of which is this
private string ExtractJsonFile(string filename)
{
var filePath = HttpContext.Server.MapPath(filename);
var json = System.IO.File.ReadAllText(filePath);
return json;
}
I plan on doing many Unit Tests on this particular action, but I'm starting with a very simple Unit Test which checks that the correct type of ActionResult is returned
[Test]
public void Search_Get_ReturnsViewResult()
{
// arrange
var performanceController = PerformanceControllerInstance;
// act
var result = performanceController.Search();
//assert
Assert.IsNotNull(result as ViewResult);
}
The test is failing because of the ExtractJsonFile method. It uses HttpContext and that is null. I am using Rhino Mocks to do the mocking of the various classes.
What would be the best way to Unit Test this? Darin in this thread suggest we avoid HttpContext.Current if we want our code Unit Tested.
By the way I tried mocking the HttpContext and made it not null, but then the Server is null, I can go ahead and mock that too I suppose (I don't know how yet), but is there no better way? I've no problem doing major refactoring if needed.

HttpContext.Server.MapPath would require an underlying virtual directory provider which would not exist during the unit test. Abstract the path mapping behind a service that you can mock to make the code testable.
public interface IPathProvider {
string MapPath(string path);
}
In the implementation of the concrete service you can make your call to map the path and retrieve the file.
public class ServerPathProvider: IPathProvider {
public string MapPath(string path) {
return HttpContext.Current.Server.MapPath(path);
}
}
you would inject the abstraction into your controller or where needed and used
public MyController : Controller {
public MyController(IPathProvider pathProvider) {
this.pathProvider = pathProvider;
}
//...other code removed for brevity
private string ExtractJsonFile(string filename) {
var filePath = pathProvider.MapPath(filename);
var json = System.IO.File.ReadAllText(filePath);
return json;
}
}
Using your mocking framework of choice you can then mock the provider
[Test]
public void Search_Get_ReturnsViewResult() {
// arrange
IPathProvider mockedPathProvider = //...insert your mock/fake/stub here
var performanceController = PerformanceControllerInstance(mockedPathProvider);
// act
var result = performanceController.Search();
//assert
Assert.IsNotNull(result as ViewResult);
}
and not be coupled to HttpContext
You could even go further and refactor the entire ExtractJsonFile(string filename) into its own service to get around being tied to disk as well.
public interface IJsonProvider {
string ExtractJsonFile(string filename);
}
This service is now flexible enough to get the file from other sources like web service if needed.

Unit Testing a controller that uses windows authentication

-------Please see updates below as I now have this set up for dependency injection and the use of the MOQ mocking framework. I'd still like to split up my repository so it doesn't directly depend on pulling the windowsUser within the same function.
I have a Web API in an intranet site that populates a dropdown. The query behind the dropdown takes the windows username as a parameter to return the list.
I realize I don't have all of this set up correctly because I'm not able to unit test it. I need to know how this "should" be set up to allow unit testing and then what the unit tests should look like.
Additional info: this is an ASP.NET MVC 5 application.
INTERFACE
public interface ITestRepository
{
HttpResponseMessage DropDownList();
}
REPOSITORY
public class ExampleRepository : IExampleRepository
{
//Accessing the data through Entity Framework
private MyDatabaseEntities db = new MyDatabaseEntities();
public HttpResponseMessage DropDownList()
{
//Get the current windows user
string windowsUser = HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name;
//Pass the parameter to a procedure running a select query
var sourceQuery = (from p in db.spDropDownList(windowsUser)
select p).ToList();
string result = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(sourceQuery);
var response = new HttpResponseMessage();
response.Content = new StringContent(result, System.Text.Encoding.Unicode, "application/json");
return response;
}
}
CONTROLLER
public class ExampleController : ApiController
{
private IExampleRepository _exampleRepository;
public ExampleController()
{
_exampleRepository = new ExampleRepository();
}
[HttpGet]
public HttpResponseMessage DropDownList()
{
try
{
return _exampleRepository.DropDownList();
}
catch
{
throw new HttpResponseException(new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.NotFound));
}
}
}
UPDATE 1
I have updated my Controller based on BartoszKP's suggestion to show dependency injection.
UPDATED CONTROLLER
public class ExampleController : ApiController
{
private IExampleRepository _exampleRepository;
//Dependency Injection
public ExampleController(IExampleRepository exampleRepository)
{
_exampleRepository = exampleRepository;
}
[HttpGet]
public HttpResponseMessage DropDownList()
{
try
{
return _exampleRepository.DropDownList();
}
catch
{
throw new HttpResponseException(new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.NotFound));
}
}
}
UPDATE 2
I have decided to use MOQ as a mocking framework for unit testing. I'm able to test something simple, like the following. This would test a simple method that doesn't take any parameters and doesn't include the windowsUser part.
[TestMethod]
public void ExampleOfAnotherTest()
{
//Arrange
var mockRepository = new Mock<IExampleRepository>();
mockRepository
.Setup(x => x.DropDownList())
.Returns(new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.OK));
ExampleController controller = new ExampleController(mockRepository.Object);
controller.Request = new HttpRequestMessage();
controller.Configuration = new HttpConfiguration();
//Act
var response = controller.DropDownList();
//Assert
Assert.AreEqual(HttpStatusCode.OK, response.StatusCode);
}
I need help testing the DropDownList method (one that does include code to get the windowsUser). I need advice on how to break this method apart. I know both parts shouldn't been in the same method. I don't know how to arrange splitting out the windowsUser variable. I realize this really should be brought in as a parameter, but I can't figure out how.

You usually do not unit-test repositories (integration tests verify if they really persist the data in the database correctly) - see for example this article on MSDN:
Typically, it is difficult to unit test the repositories themselves, so it is often better to write integration tests for them.
So, let's focus on testing only the controller.
Change the controller to take IExampleRepository in its constructor as a parameter:
private IExampleRepository _exampleRepository;
public ExampleController(IExampleRepository exampleRepository)
{
_exampleRepository = exampleRepository;
}
Then, in your unit tests, use one of mocking frameworks (such as RhinoMock for example) to create a stub for the sole purpose of testing the controller.
[TestFixture]
public class ExampleTestFixture
{
private IExampleRepository CreateRepositoryStub(fake data)
{
var exampleRepositoryStub = ...; // create the stub with a mocking framework
// make the stub return given fake data
return exampleRepositoryStub;
}
[Test]
public void GivenX_WhenDropDownListIsRequested_ReturnsY()
{
// Arrange
var exampleRepositoryStub = CreateRepositoryStub(X);
var exampleController = new ExampleController(exampleRepositoryStub);
// Act
var result = exampleController.DropDownList();
// Assert
Assert.That(result, Is.Equal(Y));
}
}
This is just a quick&dirty example - CreateRepositoryStub method should be of course extracted to some test utility class. Perhaps it should return a fluent interface to make the test's Arrange section more readable on what is given. Something more like:
// Arrange
var exampleController
= GivenAController()
.WithFakeData(X);
(with better names that reflect your business logic of course).
In case of ASP.NET MVC, the framework needs to know how to construct the controller. Fortunately, ASP.NET supports the Dependency Injection paradigm and a parameterless constructor is not required when using MVC unity.
Also, note the comment by Richard Szalay:
You shouldn't use HttpContext.Current in WebApi - you can use base.User which comes from HttpRequestBase.User and is mockable. If you really want to continue using HttpContext.Current, take a look at Mock HttpContext.Current in Test Init Method

One trick that I find very useful when trying to make old code testable when said code is accessing some global static or other messy stuff that I can't easily just parameterize is to wrap access to the resource in a virtual method call. Then you can subclass your system under test and use that in the unit test instead.
Example, using a hard dependency in the System.Random class
public class Untestable
{
public int CalculateSomethingRandom()
{
return new Random().Next() + new Random().Next();
}
}
Now we replace var rng = new Random();
public class Untestable
{
public int CalculateSomethingRandom()
{
return GetRandomNumber() + GetRandomNumber();
}
protected virtual int GetRandomNumber()
{
return new Random().Next();
}
}
Now we can create a testable version of the class:
public class Testable : Untestable
{
protected override int GetRandomNumber()
{
// You can return whatever you want for your test here,
// it depends on what type of behaviour you are faking.
// You can easily inject values here via a constructor or
// some public field in the subclass. You can also add
// counters for times method was called, save the args etc.
return 4;
}
}
The drawback with this method is that you can't use (most) isolation frameworks to implement protected methods (easily), and for good reason, since protected methods are sort of internal and shouldn't be all that important to your unit tests. It's still a really handy way of getting things covered with tests so you can refactor them, instead of having to spend 10 hours without tests, trying to do major architectual changes to your code before you get to "safety".
Just another tool to keep in mind, I find it comes in handy from time to time!
EDIT: More concretely, in your case you might want to create a protected virtual string GetLoggedInUserName(). This will technically speaking keep the actual call to HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name untested, but you will have isolated it to the simplest smallest possible method, so you can test that the code is calling the correct method the right amount of times with the correct args, and then you simply have to know that HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name contains what you want. This can later be refactored into some sort of user manager or logged in user provider, you'll see what suits best as you go along.

How write UnitTest for Web API Controller

I am exploring CodeCamper project by JohnPapa on github
https://github.com/johnpapa/CodeCamper. This is a ASP.Net SPA application and I am also working on similar project.
I interested to write some UnitTests for WebAPI controller. Controller contractor requires UnitofWork instanse and UnitofWork is initiate in Application_Start method.
When I run my UnitTest project UnitofWork object is null. How I can initiate UnitofWork from UnitTest project so that I can run my test methods. I hope make myself clear.
Here is a sample UnitTest method for following controller.
LookupsController.cs
UserControllerTest.cs
[TestClass]
public class UserControllerTest : ApiBaseController
{
[TestMethod]
public void GetRoomsTest()
{
var controller = new LookupsController(Uow);
var result = controller. GetRooms().Any();
Assert.IsTrue(result);
}
}
Again why Uow is null? What should I do, so that I can write unit test methods for this type of project/architecture.
For more detail about code you can check github repo.https://github.com/johnpapa/CodeCamper

Use any mocking framework to create a fake/stub/mock for ICodeCamperUow (below I am using NSubstitute):
[TestMethod]
public void GetRoomsTest()
{
// UOW we need to use
var fakeUOW = Substitute.For<ICodeCamperUow>();
// setting up room repository so that it returns a collection of one room
var fakeRooms = Substitute.For<IRepository<Room>>();
var fakeRoomsQueryable = new[]{new Room()}.AsQueryable();
fakeRooms.GetAll<Room>().Returns(fakeRoomsQueryable);
// connect UOW with room repository
fakeUOW.Rooms.Returns(fakeRooms);
var controller = new LookupsController(fakeUOW);
var result = controller.GetRooms().Any();
Assert.IsTrue(result);
}
Please consider reading The Art of Unit Testing which is a great book to learn about unit testing.