blocks|key|1782587|text|我认为在这种情况下，我要做的是测试当计时器滴答作响时实际执行的代码，而不是整个序列。你真正需要决定的是，是否值得测试应用程序的实际行为(例如，如果每个刻度从一个刻度到另一个刻度发生了巨大的变化)，或者只测试您的逻辑是否足够(也就是说，每次操作都是相同的)。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1782588|由于计时器的行为保证永远不会改变，它要么会正常工作(即，你已经正确配置了它)，要么就不会；如果你实际上不需要的话，把它包含在你的测试中似乎是白费力气。|1782589|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

I think what I would do in this case is test the code that actually executes when the timer ticks, rather than the entire sequence. What you really need to decide is whether it is worthwhile for you to test the actual behaviour of the application (for example, if what happens after every tick changes drastically from one tick to another), or whether it is sufficient (that is to say, the action is the same every time) to just test your logic.

Since the timer's behaviour is guaranteed never to change, it's either going to work properly (ie, you've configured it right) or not; it seems to be to be wasted effort to include that in your test if you don't actually need to.

blocks|key|1567707|text|我所做的是模拟计时器，以及当前的系统时间，我的事件可以立即触发，但就被测试的代码而言，经过的时间是秒。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1567708|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|D|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|-4|5|6|7|E|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|C|$]]

What I have done is to mock the timer, and also the current system time, that my events could be triggered immediately, but as far as the code under test was concerned time elapsed was seconds.

blocks|key|1567743|text|Len+Holgate有一系列的20+articles+on+testing+timer+based+code。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|offset|length|data|1567744|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://www.lenholgate.com/|1|http://www.lenholgate.com/archives/000306.html^0|0|B|0|G|13|1|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@$A|O|B|P|1|Q]|$A|R|B|S|1|T]]|C|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|U|8|@]|9|@]|C|$]]]|E|$F|$5|G|H|I|C|$J|K]]|L|$5|G|H|I|C|$J|M]]]]

<a href="http://www.lenholgate.com/" rel="noreferrer">Len Holgate</a> has a series of <a href="http://www.lenholgate.com/archives/000306.html" rel="noreferrer">20 articles on testing timer based code</a>.

blocks|key|1567817|text|我同意丹尼的观点，因为从单元测试的角度来看，简单地忘记计时器机制并只验证操作本身是否按预期工作可能是有意义的。我也不同意将计时器的配置包含在某种自动化测试套件中是浪费精力的说法。在使用计时应用程序时，有很多边缘情况，通过只测试容易测试的东西，很容易造成错误的安全感。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1567818|我建议使用一套测试来运行计时器和实际操作。这个套件可能需要一段时间才能运行，并且很可能不是在本地计算机上一直运行的东西。但是，在夜间自动构建上设置这些类型的内容确实可以帮助在发现和修复变得太难之前根治But。|1567819|因此，简而言之，我对您的问题的回答是，不要担心编写一些确实需要很长时间运行的测试。尽可能进行单元测试，并使测试套件快速且频繁地运行，但要确保使用运行频率较低但涵盖应用程序及其配置更多的集成测试来补充。|1567820|entityMap^0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|-4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|G|$]]

I agree with Danny insofar as it probably makes sense from a unit-testing perspective to simply forget about the timer mechanism and just verify that the action itself works as expected. I would also say that I disagree in that it's wasted effort to include the configuration of the timer in an automated test suite of some kind. There are a lot of edge cases when it comes to working with timing applications and it's very easy to create a false sense of security by only testing the things that are easy to test.

I would recommend having a suite of tests that runs the timer as well as the real action. This suite will probably take a while to run and would likely not be something you would run all the time on your local machine. But setting these types of things up on a nightly automated build can really help root out bugs before they become too hard to find and fix.

So in short my answer to your question is don't worry about writing a few tests that do take a long time to run. Unit test what you can and make that test suite run fast and often but make sure to supplement that with integration tests that run less frequently but cover more of the application and its configuration.

I am currently writing a simple, timer based mini app in C# that performs an action n times every k seconds. 
I am trying to adopt a test driven development style, so my goal is to unit test all parts of the app.

So, my question is: Is there a good way to unit test a timer based class?

The problem, as I see it, is that there is a big risk that the tests will take uncomfortably long to execute, since they must wait so and so long for the desired actions to happen. 
Especially if one wants realistic data (seconds), instead of using the minimal time resolution allowed by the framework (1 ms?). 
I am using a mock object for the action, to register the number of times the action was called, and so that the action takes practically no time.

Unit testing a timer based application?

翻译质量差，导致语言生硬或混乱。

没有提供实际的解决方法或示例。

解答不清晰，无法理解或解决问题。

页面排版不美观，阅读体验差。

文章

问答

视频

教程

学习中心

腾讯云实验室

直播

竞赛

腾讯云代码分析专区

腾讯iOA零信任安全管理系统专区

腾讯云架构师技术同盟交流圈

腾讯云数据库专区

腾讯云智能顾问专区

腾讯云原生专区

腾讯混元专区

腾讯云TCE专区

腾讯云Lighthouse专区

腾讯云HAI专区

腾讯云Edgeone专区

腾讯云存储专区

腾讯云智能专区

腾讯轻联专区 

腾讯云开发专区

TAPD专区

腾讯轻量云游戏服专区

腾讯云最具价值专家

腾讯云架构师技术同盟

腾讯云创作之星

腾讯云开发者先锋

腾讯云代码助手

云原生构建

TAPD 敏捷项目管理

Cloud Studio

SDK中心

API中心

命令行工具

涵盖代码开发、场景应用、自动测试全流程，助你从零构建专属AI助手

一站式MCP教程库，解锁AI应用新玩法

聚焦“写作效率、视觉美观与运行性能”三方面进行全面升级，为您提供更高效、稳定的创作环境

社区富文本&Markdown编辑器全新改版上线，欢迎大家体验!

诚挚邀请您参与本次调研，分享您的真实使用感受与建议。您的反馈至关重要，感谢您的支持与参与！

社区新版编辑器体验调研

我目前正在写一个简单的，基于计时器的C#迷你应用程序，它每k秒执行一个动作n次。我正在尝试采用一种测试驱动的开发风格，所以我的目标是对应用程序的所有部分进行单元测试。所以，我的问题是:有没有一个好的方法来对基于计时器的类进行单元测试？在我看来，问题是有一个很大的风险，那就是测试将花费令人不安的长时间来执行，因为它们必须...

问单元测试基于定时器的应用程序？
EN

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问单元测试基于定时器的应用程序？EN