PHP unit testing framework with built in mocks and stubs. Runs in the browser, or via the command line.

Hi, I try to create a stub with multiple calls, but I don't know to make it...

With PHPUnit

$service->expects($this->any()) ->method('readTemp') ->will($this->onConsecutiveCalls(10,12,14));

With Mockery

$service->shouldReceive('readTemp')->times(3)->andReturn(10, 12, 14);

With Phake

\Phake::when($service)->readTemp()->thenReturn(10) ->thenReturn(12) ->thenReturn(14);

It's possible to do, thanks.

I've added Exception handling abilities to the Scenarios class, I'll be comitting it after I've made/altered the unit tests for it. But doing this I've realised that EnhancePHP's support for exceptions isn't great. It doesn't let you specify the exact exception expected, and it also has a strange API for it. Currently, you have to call throws with the classname and method you wish to throw the exception. I understand why this is needed, since you can't catch an exception if the method is called in the actual test. But I've been having a think, and maybe it would be better to utilise PHP's support for anonymous functions. So instead of:

\Enhance\Assert::throws($someClass, 'MethodName', array(2, 'Arg2', 5));

You'd call: \Enhance\Assert::throws('ExpectedException', function(){ $someClass->MethodName(2, 'Arg2', 5); });

This way it follows a more consistent API with the expectations class, they can still specify a non-anonymous callback (e.g. array($someClass, 'MethodName')), and they can specify what callback to expect.

I'm happy to code this up if anyone likes the idea, but it would cause a change in the API - is this ok with everyone?

P.S. I couldn't find a good place to discuss this so I made it as an issue, I'm still fairly new to GitHub!

Hello,

I really like Enhance PHP Framework because is so easy to use, and because my native language is Romanian I thought that will be a good idea to help the project with a romanian translation.

Anyway, i want to congratulate you all for the greate work done.

Best Regard, Tofan Andrei, PHP Developer

TestFixture is an empty class by default used only for discovery, but PHP makes it a pain to redeclare classes, so I usually implement an abstract class that has some shared setUp and tearDown instructions that inherits from TestFixture, and all my concrete test classes inherit from that abstract class.

The problem is that runTests will break trying to instantiate the abstract class, since it does not check for that. The following is the code I use to patch EnhancePHP on my systems:

<?php
private function AddClassIfTest($className)
{
    $class = new ReflectionClass($className);
    if ($class->isAbstract()) {
        return;
    }
    ...
?>

Description: All code in the documentation is being displayed in a single wrapped line of text.

Expected: Correctly format in multiple lines and syntax-highlight the code.

Environment: Firefox 12 and Chrome 19 on OS X 10.7

When trying to verify a mock has been correctly accessed using Mock->verifyExpectations() the code throws an Exception (EnhanceTestFramework.php on line 819) this is never caught.

Looks to me like it should through a TestException as this is handled correctly by Test->run() on line 743

I've made the change on my local copy and it seems to work well.

Many thanks for this super lightweight framework

Cheers

Tosh

This is an issue specially on Mac which has .DS_Store files all over the place, and the discoverTests include causes binary data to be output on the test results.

diff --git a/external/EnhanceTestFramework.php b/external/EnhanceTestFramework.php
index 2ebcbb4..45486a5 100755
--- a/external/EnhanceTestFramework.php
+++ b/external/EnhanceTestFramework.php
@@ -393,7 +393,7 @@ class EnhanceFileSystem
         $files = array();
         if ($handle = opendir($directory)) {
             while (false !== ($file = readdir($handle))) {
-                if ($file != '.' && $file != '..') {
+                if ($file != '.' && $file != '..' && strpos($file, '.') != 0) {
                     if ($this->isFolderExcluded($file, $excludeRules)){
                         continue;
                     }

Now Codespy shows which of your testes executed a certain statement. To do this I have to add one line to Enhance-php's code, in the run function. Basically it is to just assign the function name which is going to be executed to a codespy variable.

In the html report, when you hover over an executed statement, the browser popup will show you the tests that executed that statement. here is a screen shot. http://i39.tinypic.com/t0m437.jpg

Hi,

I have updated Codespy to the latest version. The things I have added are.

• Statement coverage. Approximately calculates the number of executable statements that are inside functions/methods in a file and calculates the number of statements executed among them. This basically counts the number of executable statements (approximated by counting the semicolons) that are inside functions/methods and use it to calculate the coverage.
• An index.html page that contains the summary of the coverage reports listing file names with line coverage and statement coverage percentages and a link to the code coverage view of the corresponding file.
• There is a partial implementation of path coverage analysis, but it is not really helpful at this point.

I have put back the output path to the same directory set by you. So you just have to download and run the index.php in Codespy directory to see its working.

• Changed CodeCoverageWrapper's constructor to also log the initial call to the __construct method on the proxied class.
• Added filename and line number info to failed test output.
• Added checks for all standard PHP types. Note: These need unit tests, which I am working on.
• Fixed getDescription to work with boolean values.

I run the Getting Started Code:

<?php

include_once('EnhanceTestFramework.php');
// Include your classes and test fixtures - they can be in separate files, just use include() statements for them!

class ExampleClass
{
    public function addTwoNumbers($a, $b)
    {
        return $a + $b;
    }
}
// Naming: By using "extends \Enhance\TestFixture" you signal that the public methods in // your class are tests.

class ExampleClassTests extends \Enhance\TestFixture
{
    private $target;

    public function setUp()
    {
        $this->target = \Enhance\Core::getCodeCoverageWrapper('ExampleClass');
    }
    public function addTwoNumbersWith3and2Expect5()
    {
        $result = $this->target->addTwoNumbers(3, 2);
        \Enhance\Assert::areIdentical(5, $result);
    }
}

Enhance\Core::runTests();

```

and get:

`Fatal error: Uncaught TypeError: get_parent_class(): Argument #1 ($object_or_class) must be an object or a valid class name, bool given in /Users/thome/php/public/EnhanceTestFramework.php on line 603`

Can you help to put me on the track?

Hey all.

I was wondering if Composer compatibility is on the road-map?

If not, would you accept a PR that created it? I love the test framework, but I'd love to be able to take advantage of Composer's excellent dependency management and Packagist's lovely deployment.

Cheers