Stryker.NET
Moq
Our great sponsors
Stryker.NET | Moq | |
---|---|---|
14 | 26 | |
1,711 | 5,215 | |
1.5% | - | |
9.3 | 6.6 | |
about 13 hours ago | 10 months ago | |
C# | C# | |
Apache License 2.0 | GNU General Public License v3.0 or later |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
Stryker.NET
-
Stryker.NET alternatives - Testura.Mutation, visualmutator, fettle, and Faultify
5 projects | 9 Jun 2023
-
Do you guys mock everything in your Unit Tests?
Bogus - For creating fake data Verify - Snapshot testing for .NET MELT - For testing ILogger usage Stryker - Mutation Testing for .NET TestContainers - run docker programmatically in integration tests
-
Scope of unit testing (karma/Jas) Boss wants unreasonable testing?
This is called mutation testing btw.
-
Don't target 100% coverage
Let's try it on our small example using Stryker.
- PhD'ers, what are you working on? What CS topics excite you?
-
Killing mutants to improve your tests
There are tools that do this automatically, stryker[2] is one of them. When you run stryker, it will create many mutant versions of your production code, and run your tests for each mutant (that's how mutations are called in stryker's' documentation) version of the code. If your tests fail then the mutant is killed. If your tests passed, the mutant survived. Let's have a look at the the result of runnning stryker against reffects-store's code:
-
Not sure if popular opinion: Greenfield projects should have 100% test coverage.
Mutation testing is pretty solid. Better than code coverage for sure. Using Stryker personally.
-
Seriously what are they and why does everyone hate them?
A mutation testing tool (like Stryker) runs your unit tests to verify they all pass then makes a small change (mutation) to your code and reruns the tests. At least one test should fail because the modified code should behave differently.
-
Relesed v1.0.0 of my pet javasscript project yesterday after hitting 100% coverage- a gesture detection library
I haven't tried it yet, but last time I researched it, this is the library that looked most promising: https://stryker-mutator.io/
-
Mutation Testing in NodeJS
Website: https://stryker-mutator.io/
Moq
-
Setting up a simple testing project with C#
In terms of mocking there are several frameworks you can use, but I've mainly relied on Moq and NSubstitute. Within this demo, I'm going to use NSubstitute as I've found it a little easier to use.
-
What if writing tests was a joyful experience
Or you just run into bullshit like https://github.com/Moq/moq4/issues/173
- Moq.NET Mocking framework [C#]
-
Dependency injection
Now to the real benefit of DI: If you are testing a method in your application that calls the ReservationRepository.GetReservation() method, you can use a library like Moq to simply "mock" a class that uses the IReservationRepository interface and define the return result of the GetReservation() method. Pass the mocked class into the constructor of the class you are testing.
-
Usefully links for DotNet Backend Developers
MOQ https://github.com/moq/moq4
-
I need a C# crash course for experienced developers
Moq
-
A Tale of 2 Codebases (Part 2 of 4): Testability
Both projects use similar testing infrastructure. I write unit tests in C# using XUnit.net. I frequently use mock objects in testing, and MOQ is my tool of choice. I utilize continuous testing and coverage analysis through Rider. I do not have specific objectives for code coverage. When writing complicated algorithms, I frequently shoot for 100% coverage of the algorithm. I test simple properties inconsistently, and frequently do not test guard clauses.
-
Moq vs NSubstitute: syntax cheat sheet
🔗 Moq documentation | GitHub
-
What's your go-to unit testing tool?
But the reality is that I don't really write my tests with it. Toss on the MSTest attributes as needed of course. But all the testing code itself is FluentAssertions with a bit of Moq. (Though I find rarely need to use Moq/mocking anymore -- scandalous, I know.)
-
How YOU can Learn Mock testing in .NET Core and C# with Moq
Moq tutorial
What are some alternatives?
xUnit - xUnit.net is a free, open source, community-focused unit testing tool for .NET.
FakeItEasy - The easy mocking library for .NET
sharpfuzz - AFL-based fuzz testing for .NET
NSubstitute - A friendly substitute for .NET mocking libraries.
MSTest - MSTest framework and adapter
Bogus - :card_index: A simple fake data generator for C#, F#, and VB.NET. Based on and ported from the famed faker.js.
AutoMoq - Auto mocking provider for Moq.
should - Should Assertion Library
AutoFixture - AutoFixture is an open source library for .NET designed to minimize the 'Arrange' phase of your unit tests in order to maximize maintainability. Its primary goal is to allow developers to focus on what is being tested rather than how to setup the test scenario, by making it easier to create object graphs containing test data.
GenFu - GenFu is a library you can use to generate realistic test data. It is composed of several property fillers that can populate commonly named properties through reflection using an internal database of values or randomly created data. You can override any of the fillers, give GenFu hints on how to fill them.
Fluent Assertions - A very extensive set of extension methods that allow you to more naturally specify the expected outcome of a TDD or BDD-style unit tests. Targets .NET Framework 4.7, as well as .NET Core 2.1, .NET Core 3.0, .NET 6, .NET Standard 2.0 and 2.1. Supports the unit test frameworks MSTest2, NUnit3, XUnit2, MSpec, and NSpec3.