You’re looking for the ids argument of pytest.mark.parametrize: list of string ids, or a callable. If strings, each is corresponding to the argvalues so that they are part of the test id. If callable, it should take one argument (a single argvalue) and return a string or return None. Your code would look like @pytest.mark.parametrize( … Read more
@TestInstance(PER_CLASS) You may select the “single test instance per class” mode annotating the nested class with @TestInstance(TestInstance.Lifecycle.PER_CLASS): class ColorTest { @Nested @TestInstance(TestInstance.Lifecycle.PER_CLASS) class Inner { @ParameterizedTest @MethodSource(“colors”) void blue(Color color, int blue) { Assertions.assertEquals(color.getBlue(), blue); } Stream<Arguments> colors() { return Stream.of( Arguments.of(Color.BLACK, 0), Arguments.of(Color.GRAY, 128), Arguments.of(Color.BLUE, 255) ); } } } When using this mode, … Read more
I had the same issue. Unfortunately it would not let me use a PowerMock Rule due to the JVM I had. Instead of the rule I used RunnerDelegate. @RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class) @PowerMockRunnerDelegate(Parameterized.class)
Let’s say that you have your category ids in an integer array and Name is a string. The trick is to create the command text to allow you to enter all of your category ids as individual parameters and construct the fuzzy match for name. To do the former, we use a loop to construct … Read more
You could structure your test with the Enclosed runner. @RunWith(Enclosed.class) public class TestClass { @RunWith(Parameterized.class) public static class TheParameterizedPart { @Parameters public static Object[][] data() { … } @Test public void someTest() { … } @Test public void anotherTest() { … } } public static class NotParameterizedPart { @Test public void someTest() { … } … Read more
From what I understand: With Parameterized tests you can supply a series of static inputs to a test case. Theories are similar but different in concept. The idea behind them is to create test cases that test on assumptions rather than static values. So if my supplied test data is true according to some assumptions, … Read more
JUnit 5 As of Junit 5.0.0 you can now annotate your test methods with @ParameterizedTest. So no need for inner classes. There are many ways to supply the arguments to the parameterized test apart from ValueSource as shown below. See the official junit user guide for details: import org.junit.jupiter.api.Test; import org.junit.jupiter.api.ParameterizedTest; import org.junit.jupiter.params.provider.ValueSource; public class … Read more
This answer is similar to Tarek’s one (the parametrized part), although I think it is a bit more extensible. Also solves your problem and you won’t have failed tests if everything is correct: @RunWith(Parameterized.class) public class CalculatorTest { enum Type {SUBSTRACT, ADD}; @Parameters public static Collection<Object[]> data(){ return Arrays.asList(new Object[][] { {Type.SUBSTRACT, 3.0, 2.0, 1.0}, … Read more
This feature has made it into JUnit 4.11. To use change the name of parameterized tests, you say: @Parameters(name=”namestring”) namestring is a string, which can have the following special placeholders: {index} – the index of this set of arguments. The default namestring is {index}. {0} – the first parameter value from this invocation of the … Read more