693 lines
28 KiB
Plaintext
693 lines
28 KiB
Plaintext
=====================================
|
||
Writing your first Django app, part 5
|
||
=====================================
|
||
|
||
This tutorial begins where :doc:`Tutorial 4 </intro/tutorial04>` left off.
|
||
We've built a Web-poll application, and we'll now create some automated tests
|
||
for it.
|
||
|
||
Introducing automated testing
|
||
=============================
|
||
|
||
What are automated tests?
|
||
-------------------------
|
||
|
||
Tests are simple routines that check the operation of your code.
|
||
|
||
Testing operates at different levels. Some tests might apply to a tiny detail
|
||
(*does a particular model method return values as expected?*) while others
|
||
examine the overall operation of the software (*does a sequence of user inputs
|
||
on the site produce the desired result?*). That's no different from the kind of
|
||
testing you did earlier in :doc:`Tutorial 2 </intro/tutorial02>`, using the
|
||
:djadmin:`shell` to examine the behavior of a method, or running the
|
||
application and entering data to check how it behaves.
|
||
|
||
What's different in *automated* tests is that the testing work is done for
|
||
you by the system. You create a set of tests once, and then as you make changes
|
||
to your app, you can check that your code still works as you originally
|
||
intended, without having to perform time consuming manual testing.
|
||
|
||
Why you need to create tests
|
||
----------------------------
|
||
|
||
So why create tests, and why now?
|
||
|
||
You may feel that you have quite enough on your plate just learning
|
||
Python/Django, and having yet another thing to learn and do may seem
|
||
overwhelming and perhaps unnecessary. After all, our polls application is
|
||
working quite happily now; going through the trouble of creating automated
|
||
tests is not going to make it work any better. If creating the polls
|
||
application is the last bit of Django programming you will ever do, then true,
|
||
you don't need to know how to create automated tests. But, if that's not the
|
||
case, now is an excellent time to learn.
|
||
|
||
Tests will save you time
|
||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||
|
||
Up to a certain point, 'checking that it seems to work' will be a satisfactory
|
||
test. In a more sophisticated application, you might have dozens of complex
|
||
interactions between components.
|
||
|
||
A change in any of those components could have unexpected consequences on the
|
||
application's behavior. Checking that it still 'seems to work' could mean
|
||
running through your code's functionality with twenty different variations of
|
||
your test data just to make sure you haven't broken something - not a good use
|
||
of your time.
|
||
|
||
That's especially true when automated tests could do this for you in seconds.
|
||
If something's gone wrong, tests will also assist in identifying the code
|
||
that's causing the unexpected behavior.
|
||
|
||
Sometimes it may seem a chore to tear yourself away from your productive,
|
||
creative programming work to face the unglamorous and unexciting business
|
||
of writing tests, particularly when you know your code is working properly.
|
||
|
||
However, the task of writing tests is a lot more fulfilling than spending hours
|
||
testing your application manually or trying to identify the cause of a
|
||
newly-introduced problem.
|
||
|
||
Tests don't just identify problems, they prevent them
|
||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||
|
||
It's a mistake to think of tests merely as a negative aspect of development.
|
||
|
||
Without tests, the purpose or intended behavior of an application might be
|
||
rather opaque. Even when it's your own code, you will sometimes find yourself
|
||
poking around in it trying to find out what exactly it's doing.
|
||
|
||
Tests change that; they light up your code from the inside, and when something
|
||
goes wrong, they focus light on the part that has gone wrong - *even if you
|
||
hadn't even realized it had gone wrong*.
|
||
|
||
Tests make your code more attractive
|
||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||
|
||
You might have created a brilliant piece of software, but you will find that
|
||
many other developers will simply refuse to look at it because it lacks tests;
|
||
without tests, they won't trust it. Jacob Kaplan-Moss, one of Django's
|
||
original developers, says "Code without tests is broken by design."
|
||
|
||
That other developers want to see tests in your software before they take it
|
||
seriously is yet another reason for you to start writing tests.
|
||
|
||
Tests help teams work together
|
||
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
||
|
||
The previous points are written from the point of view of a single developer
|
||
maintaining an application. Complex applications will be maintained by teams.
|
||
Tests guarantee that colleagues don't inadvertently break your code (and that
|
||
you don't break theirs without knowing). If you want to make a living as a
|
||
Django programmer, you must be good at writing tests!
|
||
|
||
Basic testing strategies
|
||
========================
|
||
|
||
There are many ways to approach writing tests.
|
||
|
||
Some programmers follow a discipline called "`test-driven development`_"; they
|
||
actually write their tests before they write their code. This might seem
|
||
counter-intuitive, but in fact it's similar to what most people will often do
|
||
anyway: they describe a problem, then create some code to solve it. Test-driven
|
||
development simply formalizes the problem in a Python test case.
|
||
|
||
More often, a newcomer to testing will create some code and later decide that
|
||
it should have some tests. Perhaps it would have been better to write some
|
||
tests earlier, but it's never too late to get started.
|
||
|
||
Sometimes it's difficult to figure out where to get started with writing tests.
|
||
If you have written several thousand lines of Python, choosing something to
|
||
test might not be easy. In such a case, it's fruitful to write your first test
|
||
the next time you make a change, either when you add a new feature or fix a bug.
|
||
|
||
So let's do that right away.
|
||
|
||
.. _test-driven development: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test-driven_development
|
||
|
||
Writing our first test
|
||
======================
|
||
|
||
We identify a bug
|
||
-----------------
|
||
|
||
Fortunately, there's a little bug in the ``polls`` application for us to fix
|
||
right away: the ``Question.was_published_recently()`` method returns ``True`` if
|
||
the ``Question`` was published within the last day (which is correct) but also if
|
||
the ``Question``’s ``pub_date`` field is in the future (which certainly isn't).
|
||
|
||
To check if the bug really exists, using the Admin create a question whose date
|
||
lies in the future and check the method using the :djadmin:`shell`::
|
||
|
||
>>> import datetime
|
||
>>> from django.utils import timezone
|
||
>>> from polls.models import Question
|
||
>>> # create a Question instance with pub_date 30 days in the future
|
||
>>> future_question = Question(pub_date=timezone.now() + datetime.timedelta(days=30))
|
||
>>> # was it published recently?
|
||
>>> future_question.was_published_recently()
|
||
True
|
||
|
||
Since things in the future are not 'recent', this is clearly wrong.
|
||
|
||
Create a test to expose the bug
|
||
-------------------------------
|
||
|
||
What we've just done in the :djadmin:`shell` to test for the problem is exactly
|
||
what we can do in an automated test, so let's turn that into an automated test.
|
||
|
||
A conventional place for an application's tests is in the application's
|
||
``tests.py`` file; the testing system will automatically find tests in any file
|
||
whose name begins with ``test``.
|
||
|
||
Put the following in the ``tests.py`` file in the ``polls`` application:
|
||
|
||
.. snippet::
|
||
:filename: polls/tests.py
|
||
|
||
import datetime
|
||
|
||
from django.utils import timezone
|
||
from django.test import TestCase
|
||
|
||
from .models import Question
|
||
|
||
|
||
class QuestionMethodTests(TestCase):
|
||
|
||
def test_was_published_recently_with_future_question(self):
|
||
"""
|
||
was_published_recently() should return False for questions whose
|
||
pub_date is in the future.
|
||
"""
|
||
time = timezone.now() + datetime.timedelta(days=30)
|
||
future_question = Question(pub_date=time)
|
||
self.assertEqual(future_question.was_published_recently(), False)
|
||
|
||
What we have done here is created a :class:`django.test.TestCase` subclass
|
||
with a method that creates a ``Question`` instance with a ``pub_date`` in the
|
||
future. We then check the output of ``was_published_recently()`` - which
|
||
*ought* to be False.
|
||
|
||
Running tests
|
||
-------------
|
||
|
||
In the terminal, we can run our test::
|
||
|
||
$ python manage.py test polls
|
||
|
||
and you'll see something like::
|
||
|
||
Creating test database for alias 'default'...
|
||
F
|
||
======================================================================
|
||
FAIL: test_was_published_recently_with_future_question (polls.tests.QuestionMethodTests)
|
||
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
Traceback (most recent call last):
|
||
File "/path/to/mysite/polls/tests.py", line 16, in test_was_published_recently_with_future_question
|
||
self.assertEqual(future_question.was_published_recently(), False)
|
||
AssertionError: True != False
|
||
|
||
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
Ran 1 test in 0.001s
|
||
|
||
FAILED (failures=1)
|
||
Destroying test database for alias 'default'...
|
||
|
||
What happened is this:
|
||
|
||
* ``python manage.py test polls`` looked for tests in the ``polls`` application
|
||
|
||
* it found a subclass of the :class:`django.test.TestCase` class
|
||
|
||
* it created a special database for the purpose of testing
|
||
|
||
* it looked for test methods - ones whose names begin with ``test``
|
||
|
||
* in ``test_was_published_recently_with_future_question`` it created a ``Question``
|
||
instance whose ``pub_date`` field is 30 days in the future
|
||
|
||
* ... and using the ``assertEqual()`` method, it discovered that its
|
||
``was_published_recently()`` returns ``True``, though we wanted it to return
|
||
``False``
|
||
|
||
The test informs us which test failed and even the line on which the failure
|
||
occurred.
|
||
|
||
Fixing the bug
|
||
--------------
|
||
|
||
We already know what the problem is: ``Question.was_published_recently()`` should
|
||
return ``False`` if its ``pub_date`` is in the future. Amend the method in
|
||
``models.py``, so that it will only return ``True`` if the date is also in the
|
||
past:
|
||
|
||
.. snippet::
|
||
:filename: polls/models.py
|
||
|
||
def was_published_recently(self):
|
||
now = timezone.now()
|
||
return now - datetime.timedelta(days=1) <= self.pub_date <= now
|
||
|
||
and run the test again::
|
||
|
||
Creating test database for alias 'default'...
|
||
.
|
||
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
Ran 1 test in 0.001s
|
||
|
||
OK
|
||
Destroying test database for alias 'default'...
|
||
|
||
After identifying a bug, we wrote a test that exposes it and corrected the bug
|
||
in the code so our test passes.
|
||
|
||
Many other things might go wrong with our application in the future, but we can
|
||
be sure that we won't inadvertently reintroduce this bug, because simply
|
||
running the test will warn us immediately. We can consider this little portion
|
||
of the application pinned down safely forever.
|
||
|
||
More comprehensive tests
|
||
------------------------
|
||
|
||
While we're here, we can further pin down the ``was_published_recently()``
|
||
method; in fact, it would be positively embarrassing if in fixing one bug we had
|
||
introduced another.
|
||
|
||
Add two more test methods to the same class, to test the behavior of the method
|
||
more comprehensively:
|
||
|
||
.. snippet::
|
||
:filename: polls/tests.py
|
||
|
||
def test_was_published_recently_with_old_question(self):
|
||
"""
|
||
was_published_recently() should return False for questions whose
|
||
pub_date is older than 1 day.
|
||
"""
|
||
time = timezone.now() - datetime.timedelta(days=30)
|
||
old_question = Question(pub_date=time)
|
||
self.assertEqual(old_question.was_published_recently(), False)
|
||
|
||
def test_was_published_recently_with_recent_question(self):
|
||
"""
|
||
was_published_recently() should return True for questions whose
|
||
pub_date is within the last day.
|
||
"""
|
||
time = timezone.now() - datetime.timedelta(hours=1)
|
||
recent_question = Question(pub_date=time)
|
||
self.assertEqual(recent_question.was_published_recently(), True)
|
||
|
||
And now we have three tests that confirm that ``Question.was_published_recently()``
|
||
returns sensible values for past, recent, and future questions.
|
||
|
||
Again, ``polls`` is a simple application, but however complex it grows in the
|
||
future and whatever other code it interacts with, we now have some guarantee
|
||
that the method we have written tests for will behave in expected ways.
|
||
|
||
Test a view
|
||
===========
|
||
|
||
The polls application is fairly undiscriminating: it will publish any question,
|
||
including ones whose ``pub_date`` field lies in the future. We should improve
|
||
this. Setting a ``pub_date`` in the future should mean that the Question is
|
||
published at that moment, but invisible until then.
|
||
|
||
A test for a view
|
||
-----------------
|
||
|
||
When we fixed the bug above, we wrote the test first and then the code to fix
|
||
it. In fact that was a simple example of test-driven development, but it
|
||
doesn't really matter in which order we do the work.
|
||
|
||
In our first test, we focused closely on the internal behavior of the code. For
|
||
this test, we want to check its behavior as it would be experienced by a user
|
||
through a web browser.
|
||
|
||
Before we try to fix anything, let's have a look at the tools at our disposal.
|
||
|
||
The Django test client
|
||
----------------------
|
||
|
||
Django provides a test :class:`~django.test.Client` to simulate a user
|
||
interacting with the code at the view level. We can use it in ``tests.py``
|
||
or even in the :djadmin:`shell`.
|
||
|
||
We will start again with the :djadmin:`shell`, where we need to do a couple of
|
||
things that won't be necessary in ``tests.py``. The first is to set up the test
|
||
environment in the :djadmin:`shell`::
|
||
|
||
>>> from django.test.utils import setup_test_environment
|
||
>>> setup_test_environment()
|
||
|
||
:meth:`~django.test.utils.setup_test_environment` installs a template renderer
|
||
which will allow us to examine some additional attributes on responses such as
|
||
``response.context`` that otherwise wouldn't be available. Note that this
|
||
method *does not* setup a test database, so the following will be run against
|
||
the existing database and the output may differ slightly depending on what
|
||
questions you already created.
|
||
|
||
Next we need to import the test client class (later in ``tests.py`` we will use
|
||
the :class:`django.test.TestCase` class, which comes with its own client, so
|
||
this won't be required)::
|
||
|
||
>>> from django.test import Client
|
||
>>> # create an instance of the client for our use
|
||
>>> client = Client()
|
||
|
||
With that ready, we can ask the client to do some work for us::
|
||
|
||
>>> # get a response from '/'
|
||
>>> response = client.get('/')
|
||
>>> # we should expect a 404 from that address
|
||
>>> response.status_code
|
||
404
|
||
>>> # on the other hand we should expect to find something at '/polls/'
|
||
>>> # we'll use 'reverse()' rather than a hardcoded URL
|
||
>>> from django.core.urlresolvers import reverse
|
||
>>> response = client.get(reverse('polls:index'))
|
||
>>> response.status_code
|
||
200
|
||
>>> response.content
|
||
'\n\n\n <p>No polls are available.</p>\n\n'
|
||
>>> # note - you might get unexpected results if your ``TIME_ZONE``
|
||
>>> # in ``settings.py`` is not correct. If you need to change it,
|
||
>>> # you will also need to restart your shell session
|
||
>>> from polls.models import Question
|
||
>>> from django.utils import timezone
|
||
>>> # create a Question and save it
|
||
>>> q = Question(question_text="Who is your favorite Beatle?", pub_date=timezone.now())
|
||
>>> q.save()
|
||
>>> # check the response once again
|
||
>>> response = client.get('/polls/')
|
||
>>> response.content
|
||
'\n\n\n <ul>\n \n <li><a href="/polls/1/">Who is your favorite Beatle?</a></li>\n \n </ul>\n\n'
|
||
>>> # If the following doesn't work, you probably omitted the call to
|
||
>>> # setup_test_environment() described above
|
||
>>> response.context['latest_question_list']
|
||
[<Question: Who is your favorite Beatle?>]
|
||
|
||
Improving our view
|
||
------------------
|
||
|
||
The list of polls shows polls that aren't published yet (i.e. those that have a
|
||
``pub_date`` in the future). Let's fix that.
|
||
|
||
In :doc:`Tutorial 4 </intro/tutorial04>` we introduced a class-based view,
|
||
based on :class:`~django.views.generic.list.ListView`:
|
||
|
||
.. snippet::
|
||
:filename: polls/views.py
|
||
|
||
class IndexView(generic.ListView):
|
||
template_name = 'polls/index.html'
|
||
context_object_name = 'latest_question_list'
|
||
|
||
def get_queryset(self):
|
||
"""Return the last five published questions."""
|
||
return Question.objects.order_by('-pub_date')[:5]
|
||
|
||
We need to amend the ``get_queryset()`` method and change it so that it also
|
||
checks the date by comparing it with ``timezone.now()``. First we need to add
|
||
an import:
|
||
|
||
.. snippet::
|
||
:filename: polls/views.py
|
||
|
||
from django.utils import timezone
|
||
|
||
and then we must amend the ``get_queryset`` method like so:
|
||
|
||
.. snippet::
|
||
:filename: polls/views.py
|
||
|
||
def get_queryset(self):
|
||
"""
|
||
Return the last five published questions (not including those set to be
|
||
published in the future).
|
||
"""
|
||
return Question.objects.filter(
|
||
pub_date__lte=timezone.now()
|
||
).order_by('-pub_date')[:5]
|
||
|
||
``Question.objects.filter(pub_date__lte=timezone.now())`` returns a queryset
|
||
containing ``Question``\s whose ``pub_date`` is less than or equal to - that
|
||
is, earlier than or equal to - ``timezone.now``.
|
||
|
||
Testing our new view
|
||
--------------------
|
||
|
||
Now you can satisfy yourself that this behaves as expected by firing up the
|
||
runserver, loading the site in your browser, creating ``Questions`` with dates
|
||
in the past and future, and checking that only those that have been published
|
||
are listed. You don't want to have to do that *every single time you make any
|
||
change that might affect this* - so let's also create a test, based on our
|
||
:djadmin:`shell` session above.
|
||
|
||
Add the following to ``polls/tests.py``:
|
||
|
||
.. snippet::
|
||
:filename: polls/tests.py
|
||
|
||
from django.core.urlresolvers import reverse
|
||
|
||
and we'll create a shortcut function to create questions as well as a new test
|
||
class:
|
||
|
||
.. snippet::
|
||
:filename: polls/tests.py
|
||
|
||
def create_question(question_text, days):
|
||
"""
|
||
Creates a question with the given `question_text` published the given
|
||
number of `days` offset to now (negative for questions published
|
||
in the past, positive for questions that have yet to be published).
|
||
"""
|
||
time = timezone.now() + datetime.timedelta(days=days)
|
||
return Question.objects.create(question_text=question_text,
|
||
pub_date=time)
|
||
|
||
|
||
class QuestionViewTests(TestCase):
|
||
def test_index_view_with_no_questions(self):
|
||
"""
|
||
If no questions exist, an appropriate message should be displayed.
|
||
"""
|
||
response = self.client.get(reverse('polls:index'))
|
||
self.assertEqual(response.status_code, 200)
|
||
self.assertContains(response, "No polls are available.")
|
||
self.assertQuerysetEqual(response.context['latest_question_list'], [])
|
||
|
||
def test_index_view_with_a_past_question(self):
|
||
"""
|
||
Questions with a pub_date in the past should be displayed on the
|
||
index page.
|
||
"""
|
||
create_question(question_text="Past question.", days=-30)
|
||
response = self.client.get(reverse('polls:index'))
|
||
self.assertQuerysetEqual(
|
||
response.context['latest_question_list'],
|
||
['<Question: Past question.>']
|
||
)
|
||
|
||
def test_index_view_with_a_future_question(self):
|
||
"""
|
||
Questions with a pub_date in the future should not be displayed on
|
||
the index page.
|
||
"""
|
||
create_question(question_text="Future question.", days=30)
|
||
response = self.client.get(reverse('polls:index'))
|
||
self.assertContains(response, "No polls are available.",
|
||
status_code=200)
|
||
self.assertQuerysetEqual(response.context['latest_question_list'], [])
|
||
|
||
def test_index_view_with_future_question_and_past_question(self):
|
||
"""
|
||
Even if both past and future questions exist, only past questions
|
||
should be displayed.
|
||
"""
|
||
create_question(question_text="Past question.", days=-30)
|
||
create_question(question_text="Future question.", days=30)
|
||
response = self.client.get(reverse('polls:index'))
|
||
self.assertQuerysetEqual(
|
||
response.context['latest_question_list'],
|
||
['<Question: Past question.>']
|
||
)
|
||
|
||
def test_index_view_with_two_past_questions(self):
|
||
"""
|
||
The questions index page may display multiple questions.
|
||
"""
|
||
create_question(question_text="Past question 1.", days=-30)
|
||
create_question(question_text="Past question 2.", days=-5)
|
||
response = self.client.get(reverse('polls:index'))
|
||
self.assertQuerysetEqual(
|
||
response.context['latest_question_list'],
|
||
['<Question: Past question 2.>', '<Question: Past question 1.>']
|
||
)
|
||
|
||
|
||
Let's look at some of these more closely.
|
||
|
||
First is a question shortcut function, ``create_question``, to take some
|
||
repetition out of the process of creating questions.
|
||
|
||
``test_index_view_with_no_questions`` doesn't create any questions, but checks
|
||
the message: "No polls are available." and verifies the ``latest_question_list``
|
||
is empty. Note that the :class:`django.test.TestCase` class provides some
|
||
additional assertion methods. In these examples, we use
|
||
:meth:`~django.test.SimpleTestCase.assertContains()` and
|
||
:meth:`~django.test.TransactionTestCase.assertQuerysetEqual()`.
|
||
|
||
In ``test_index_view_with_a_past_question``, we create a question and verify that it
|
||
appears in the list.
|
||
|
||
In ``test_index_view_with_a_future_question``, we create a question with a
|
||
``pub_date`` in the future. The database is reset for each test method, so the
|
||
first question is no longer there, and so again the index shouldn't have any
|
||
questions in it.
|
||
|
||
And so on. In effect, we are using the tests to tell a story of admin input
|
||
and user experience on the site, and checking that at every state and for every
|
||
new change in the state of the system, the expected results are published.
|
||
|
||
Testing the ``DetailView``
|
||
--------------------------
|
||
|
||
What we have works well; however, even though future questions don't appear in
|
||
the *index*, users can still reach them if they know or guess the right URL. So
|
||
we need to add a similar constraint to ``DetailView``:
|
||
|
||
.. snippet::
|
||
:filename: polls/views.py
|
||
|
||
class DetailView(generic.DetailView):
|
||
...
|
||
def get_queryset(self):
|
||
"""
|
||
Excludes any questions that aren't published yet.
|
||
"""
|
||
return Question.objects.filter(pub_date__lte=timezone.now())
|
||
|
||
And of course, we will add some tests, to check that a ``Question`` whose
|
||
``pub_date`` is in the past can be displayed, and that one with a ``pub_date``
|
||
in the future is not:
|
||
|
||
.. snippet::
|
||
:filename: polls/tests.py
|
||
|
||
class QuestionIndexDetailTests(TestCase):
|
||
def test_detail_view_with_a_future_question(self):
|
||
"""
|
||
The detail view of a question with a pub_date in the future should
|
||
return a 404 not found.
|
||
"""
|
||
future_question = create_question(question_text='Future question.',
|
||
days=5)
|
||
response = self.client.get(reverse('polls:detail',
|
||
args=(future_question.id,)))
|
||
self.assertEqual(response.status_code, 404)
|
||
|
||
def test_detail_view_with_a_past_question(self):
|
||
"""
|
||
The detail view of a question with a pub_date in the past should
|
||
display the question's text.
|
||
"""
|
||
past_question = create_question(question_text='Past Question.',
|
||
days=-5)
|
||
response = self.client.get(reverse('polls:detail',
|
||
args=(past_question.id,)))
|
||
self.assertContains(response, past_question.question_text,
|
||
status_code=200)
|
||
|
||
|
||
Ideas for more tests
|
||
--------------------
|
||
|
||
We ought to add a similar ``get_queryset`` method to ``ResultsView`` and
|
||
create a new test class for that view. It'll be very similar to what we have
|
||
just created; in fact there will be a lot of repetition.
|
||
|
||
We could also improve our application in other ways, adding tests along the
|
||
way. For example, it's silly that ``Questions`` can be published on the site
|
||
that have no ``Choices``. So, our views could check for this, and exclude such
|
||
``Questions``. Our tests would create a ``Question`` without ``Choices`` and
|
||
then test that it's not published, as well as create a similar ``Question``
|
||
*with* ``Choices``, and test that it *is* published.
|
||
|
||
Perhaps logged-in admin users should be allowed to see unpublished
|
||
``Questions``, but not ordinary visitors. Again: whatever needs to be added to
|
||
the software to accomplish this should be accompanied by a test, whether you
|
||
write the test first and then make the code pass the test, or work out the
|
||
logic in your code first and then write a test to prove it.
|
||
|
||
At a certain point you are bound to look at your tests and wonder whether your
|
||
code is suffering from test bloat, which brings us to:
|
||
|
||
When testing, more is better
|
||
============================
|
||
|
||
It might seem that our tests are growing out of control. At this rate there will
|
||
soon be more code in our tests than in our application, and the repetition
|
||
is unaesthetic, compared to the elegant conciseness of the rest of our code.
|
||
|
||
**It doesn't matter**. Let them grow. For the most part, you can write a test
|
||
once and then forget about it. It will continue performing its useful function
|
||
as you continue to develop your program.
|
||
|
||
Sometimes tests will need to be updated. Suppose that we amend our views so that
|
||
only ``Questions`` with ``Choices`` are published. In that case, many of our
|
||
existing tests will fail - *telling us exactly which tests need to be amended to
|
||
bring them up to date*, so to that extent tests help look after themselves.
|
||
|
||
At worst, as you continue developing, you might find that you have some tests
|
||
that are now redundant. Even that's not a problem; in testing redundancy is
|
||
a *good* thing.
|
||
|
||
As long as your tests are sensibly arranged, they won't become unmanageable.
|
||
Good rules-of-thumb include having:
|
||
|
||
* a separate ``TestClass`` for each model or view
|
||
* a separate test method for each set of conditions you want to test
|
||
* test method names that describe their function
|
||
|
||
Further testing
|
||
===============
|
||
|
||
This tutorial only introduces some of the basics of testing. There's a great
|
||
deal more you can do, and a number of very useful tools at your disposal to
|
||
achieve some very clever things.
|
||
|
||
For example, while our tests here have covered some of the internal logic of a
|
||
model and the way our views publish information, you can use an "in-browser"
|
||
framework such as Selenium_ to test the way your HTML actually renders in a
|
||
browser. These tools allow you to check not just the behavior of your Django
|
||
code, but also, for example, of your JavaScript. It's quite something to see
|
||
the tests launch a browser, and start interacting with your site, as if a human
|
||
being were driving it! Django includes :class:`~django.test.LiveServerTestCase`
|
||
to facilitate integration with tools like Selenium.
|
||
|
||
If you have a complex application, you may want to run tests automatically
|
||
with every commit for the purposes of `continuous integration`_, so that
|
||
quality control is itself - at least partially - automated.
|
||
|
||
A good way to spot untested parts of your application is to check code
|
||
coverage. This also helps identify fragile or even dead code. If you can't test
|
||
a piece of code, it usually means that code should be refactored or removed.
|
||
Coverage will help to identify dead code. See
|
||
:ref:`topics-testing-code-coverage` for details.
|
||
|
||
:doc:`Testing in Django </topics/testing/index>` has comprehensive
|
||
information about testing.
|
||
|
||
.. _Selenium: http://seleniumhq.org/
|
||
.. _continuous integration: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_integration
|
||
|
||
What's next?
|
||
============
|
||
|
||
For full details on testing, see :doc:`Testing in Django
|
||
</topics/testing/index>`.
|
||
|
||
When you're comfortable with testing Django views, read
|
||
:doc:`part 6 of this tutorial</intro/tutorial06>` to learn about
|
||
static files management.
|