The tool for Unit Testing that I use, MUNIT (xtargets),
doesn't work under R2008a. Now I'm looking for a
replacement.
In such a tool one need to run all tests in a file, which
might be implemented as invoking "all" methods of an
object. What would be the best way to do that? The feature
demonstrated by this example looks useful. However, is it
documented?
classdef DynamicReference2Method < handle
properties
end
methods
function m1( this, ii )
disp('Method, m1, running')
end
function m2( this )
disp('Method, m2, running')
end
end
end
In article <g0pohu$sji$1@fred.mathworks.com>,
"per isakson" <poi.nospam@bimDOTkthDOT.se> wrote:
> The tool for Unit Testing that I use, MUNIT (xtargets),
> doesn't work under R2008a. Now I'm looking for a
> replacement.
>
> In such a tool one need to run all tests in a file, which
> might be implemented as invoking "all" methods of an
> object. What would be the best way to do that? The feature
> demonstrated by this example looks useful. However, is it
> documented?
>
> /per
>
> >> dm = DynamicReference2Method;
> >> dm.('m1')(3)
> Method, m1, running
> >> dm.('m2')
> Method, m2, running
>
> classdef DynamicReference2Method < handle
> properties
> end
> methods
> function m1( this, ii )
> disp('Method, m1, running')
> end
> function m2( this )
> disp('Method, m2, running')
> end
> end
> end
Yes, it's documented. I don't remember where exactly, but I learned
about it by reading the docs so it's in there somewhere. It may be in
the big pdf document on object oriented programming since I remember
reading through that.
--
Doug Schwarz
dmschwarz&ieee,org
Make obvious changes to get real email address.
"per isakson" <poi.nospam@bimDOTkthDOT.se> wrote in message
news:g0pohu$sji$1@fred.mathworks.com...
> The tool for Unit Testing that I use, MUNIT (xtargets),
> doesn't work under R2008a. Now I'm looking for a
> replacement.
>
> In such a tool one need to run all tests in a file, which
> might be implemented as invoking "all" methods of an
> object. What would be the best way to do that? The feature
> demonstrated by this example looks useful. However, is it
> documented?
I'd do this using the METHODS function to obtain the list of methods, then
use FEVAL to evaluate the method or use STR2FUNC to create a function handle
to the method and invoke that using the regular functionHandle() syntax.
On May 18, 7:50=A0pm, "Steven Lord" <sl...@mathworks.com> wrote:
> "per isakson" <poi.nos...@bimDOTkthDOT.se> wrote in message
>
> news:g0pohu$sji$1@fred.mathworks.com...
>
> > The tool for Unit Testing that I use, MUNIT (xtargets),
> > doesn't work under R2008a. Now I'm looking for a
> > replacement.
>
> > In such a tool one need to run all tests in a file, which
> > might be implemented as invoking "all" methods of an
> > object. What would be the best way to do that? The feature
> > demonstrated by this example looks useful. However, is it
> > documented?
>
> I'd do this using the METHODS function to obtain the list of methods, then=
-------------------------------------------------------
If you don't know the methods in advance, and have to get their names
from the METHODS function, then how do you know what arguments to pass
to those methods? Calling a method without passing it the proper
arguments will likely cause an exception.
In article <a8af7cd9-686d-422f-afd6-1f184e74bb23
@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, imageanalyst@mailinator.com says...
> On May 18, 7:50=A0pm, "Steven Lord" <sl...@mathworks.com> wrote:
> > "per isakson" <poi.nos...@bimDOTkthDOT.se> wrote in message
> >
> > news:g0pohu$sji$1@fred.mathworks.com...
> >
> > > The tool for Unit Testing that I use, MUNIT (xtargets),
> > > doesn't work under R2008a. Now I'm looking for a
> > > replacement.
> >
> > > In such a tool one need to run all tests in a file, which
> > > might be implemented as invoking "all" methods of an
> > > object. What would be the best way to do that? The feature
> > > demonstrated by this example looks useful. However, is it
> > > documented?
> >
> > I'd do this using the METHODS function to obtain the list of methods, t=
hen
> > use FEVAL to evaluate the method or use STR2FUNC to create a function h=
andle
> > to the method and invoke that using the regular functionHandle() syntax=
.
> >
> > http://www.mathworks.com/access/helpdesk/help/techdoc/ref/methods.html
> >
> > --
> > Steve Lord
> > sl...@mathworks.com
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> If you don't know the methods in advance, and have to get their names
> from the METHODS function, then how do you know what arguments to pass
> to those methods? Calling a method without passing it the proper
> arguments will likely cause an exception.
>=20
You may be able to use nargin and nargout to help with this, but it's=20
not a full solution:
On May 19, 7:51=A0am, Loren Shure <lo...@mathworks.com> wrote:
> In article <a8af7cd9-686d-422f-afd6-1f184e74bb23
> @m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, imageanal...@mailinator.com says...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 18, 7:50=A0pm, "Steven Lord" <sl...@mathworks.com> wrote:
> > > "per isakson" <poi.nos...@bimDOTkthDOT.se> wrote in message
>
> > >news:g0pohu$sji$1@fred.mathworks.com...
>
> > > > The tool for Unit Testing that I use, MUNIT (xtargets),
> > > > doesn't work under R2008a. Now I'm looking for a
> > > > replacement.
>
> > > > In such a tool one need to run all tests in a file, which
> > > > might be implemented as invoking "all" methods of an
> > > > object. What would be the best way to do that? The feature
> > > > demonstrated by this example looks useful. However, is it
> > > > documented?
>
> > > I'd do this using the METHODS function to obtain the list of methods, =
then
> > > use FEVAL to evaluate the method or use STR2FUNC to create a function =
handle
> > > to the method and invoke that using the regular functionHandle() synta=
x.
>
> > >http://www.mathworks.com/access/helpdesk/help/techdoc/ref/methods.html
>
> > > --
> > > Steve Lord
> > > sl...@mathworks.com
>
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > If you don't know the methods in advance, and have to get their names
> > from the METHODS function, then how do you know what arguments to pass
> > to those methods? =A0Calling a method without passing it the proper
> > arguments will likely cause an exception.
>
> You may be able to use nargin and nargout to help with this, but it's
> not a full solution:
>
> http://www.mathworks.com/access/helpdesk/help/techdoc/ref/nargin.html
>
> --
> Lorenhttp://blogs.mathworks.com/loren/- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
------------------------------------------------------------------------
That just gets you the number of arguments it's expecting.
I still assert that mindlessly calling a function without knowing what
the function expects, or what you should expect in return, is
worthless. You MUST know what you're doing.
For example, maybe I can call function/method m1 and pass it a string
filename and it will be happy (say it just displays an image file),
but passing a string into m2 may throw an exception (maybe the file
doesn't exist or maybe m2 multiplies the argument by pi). And if you
don't know what the name is, then you don't know what it's expected to
do, so how can you possibly tell if it's operating properly by
checking its return value? Say I call m1 and pass in, oh say 35
(randomly pulled from my hat), and I get out, oh say 90. If I didn't
even know the name of the function, nor what it does, then how can I
be assured that 90 is the correct answer? So what's the point? This
is no way to check a function (do a "Performance Qualification with a
check sample" to use proper QA lingo) or do unit tests, unless I've
seriously misunderstood what the intent was.
Regards,
ImageAnalyst
"Steven Lord" <slord@mathworks.com> wrote in message
<g0qfcu$tp$1@fred.mathworks.com>...
>
> "per isakson" <poi.nospam@bimDOTkthDOT.se> wrote in
message
> news:g0pohu$sji$1@fred.mathworks.com...
> > The tool for Unit Testing that I use, MUNIT (xtargets),
> > doesn't work under R2008a. Now I'm looking for a
> > replacement.
> >
> > In such a tool one need to run all tests in a file,
which
> > might be implemented as invoking "all" methods of an
> > object. What would be the best way to do that? The
feature
> > demonstrated by this example looks useful. However, is
it
> > documented?
>
> I'd do this using the METHODS function to obtain the list
of methods, then
> use FEVAL to evaluate the method or use STR2FUNC to
create a function handle
> to the method and invoke that using the regular
functionHandle() syntax.
>
> http://www.mathworks.com/access/helpdesk/help/techdoc/ref/me
thods.html
>
> --
> Steve Lord
> slord@mathworks.com
>
I guess I raised three different questions:
1. How to know for sure that an operational feature in
Matlab is NOT documented*?
2. Is the calling syntax: object.(‘method1’) documented?
3. A vague question on a design detail of a unit test
framework.
*) documented meaning that The Mathworks promises that the
feature will work in future versions of Matlab.
Background: I have a large number of test and a broken unit
testing framework. Three(?) years ago I thought that it was
safe to use “evalin(‘caller’,‘@name’)” (wishful thinking?).
I had something like the following in mind:
for ca = list_of_tests
obj.setup()
… obj.(ca{:})
obj.teardown()
end
Where list_of_tests is a cell array of strings holding
names of methods, each of which implements a test.
Doug, I cannot find the text you refer to. The matter ought
to be treated in “MATLAB? 7 Classes and Object-Oriented
Programming” on page 7-9 or close.
Steve, you propose two alternatives to “object.(
strName )”, but avoid the question whether it is
documented. Thus, I should be wise and use one of your
alternatives.
Loren and ImageAnalyst, indeed the signatures of the
methods must be known beforehand. Thus, the methods, which
implement test, must honor a given signature.
In article <g0sh6p$2pq$1@fred.mathworks.com>,
"per isakson" <poi.nospam@bimDOTkthDOT.se> wrote:
[snip]
> Doug, I cannot find the text you refer to. The matter ought
> to be treated in “MATLAB? 7 Classes and Object-Oriented
> Programming” on page 7-9 or close.
I found it. Quoting from matlab_oop.pdf for R2008a, beginning on page
7-10:
Referencing Names with ExpressionsDynamic Reference
You can reference an object¹s properties or methods using an expression
in dot-parentheses syntax:
obj.(expression)
The expression must evaluate to a string that is the name of a property
or a method. For example, the following statements are equivalent:
obj.Property1
obj.('Property1')
In this case, obj is an object of a class that defines a property called
Property1. Therefore, you can pass a string variable in the parentheses
to reference to property:
propName = 'Property1';
obj.(propName)
You can call a method and pass input arguments to the method using
another set of parentheses:
obj.(expression)(arg1,arg2,...)
Using this notation, you can make dynamic references to properties and
methods in the same way you can create dynamic references to the fields
of structs (see ³Using Dynamic Field Names² for information on MATLAB
structures).
Per, I don't think you are looking at the right document.
--
Doug Schwarz
dmschwarz&ieee,org
Make obvious changes to get real email address.
Doug Schwarz <see@sig.for.address.edu> wrote in message
<snip>
> Per, I don't think you are looking at the right document.
>
> --
> Doug Schwarz
> dmschwarz&ieee,org
> Make obvious changes to get real email address.
Doug, you are perfectly right! I'm not looking the right
document and the reason is that The Mathworks has revised
matlab_oop.pdf sometimes after 02-Mar-2008. I downloaded
the current file, which is slightly bigger, and found the
text you refer to.
On 18 Mai, 19:21, "per isakson" <poi.nos...@bimDOTkthDOT.se> wrote:
> The tool for Unit Testing that I use, MUNIT (xtargets),
> doesn't work under R2008a. Now I'm looking for a
> replacement.
I ported my own testing tool, named mlUnit, to R2008a some weeks ago.
The current release is mlUnit 2 Beta 1 (so far I haven't received any
bug reports, so it seems to be quite stable), see http://sourceforge.net/projects/mlunit/
> In such a tool one need to run all tests in a file, which
> might be implemented as invoking "all" methods of an
> object.
methods
function self = test_sin(varargin)
self = self@mlunit.test_case(varargin{:});
end
function self = test_null(self)
mlunit.assert_equals(0, sin(0));
end
function self = test_sin_cos(self)
mlunit.assert_equals(cos(0), sin(pi/2));
end
end
end
>> runner = mlunit.text_test_runner(1, 1);
>> loader = mlunit.test_loader;
>> run(runner, load_tests_from_test_case(loader, 'test_sin'));
The last statement runs all methods of the class "test_sin", which
have a name beginning with "test". You can also create a method
"set_up" and a method "tear_down" to manage a test fixture, which is
shared by the test methods. A number of examples can be found in
mlUnit's own test cases: http://mlunit.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/mlunit/mlunit2/trunk/test/
Public Submission Policy
NOTICE: Any content you submit to MATLAB Central, including personal information, is not subject to the protections which may be afforded information collected under other sections of The MathWorks, Inc. Web site. You are entirely responsible for
all content that you upload, post, e-mail, transmit or otherwise make available via MATLAB Central. The MathWorks does not control the content posted by visitors to MATLAB Central and, does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of such content.
Under no circumstances will The MathWorks be liable in any way for any content not authored by The MathWorks, or any loss or damage of any kind incurred as a result of the use of any content posted, e-mailed, transmitted or otherwise made available
via MATLAB Central. Read the complete Disclaimer prior to use.
Feed for this Thread
