Ranorex (adding validation in code module) - ranorex

Hi i am using Ranorex for my wpf app
In Ranorex recording we are having validation part
but in my testcase,i not added recording file,i am just test case and code module to test an application
please help me how to add validation function in code module as we do in recording or let me know about any alternative
Thanks

i got the solution
using validate.Attribute we can validate actual and expected data

you can make your own validation function pass the parameters to it and verify for example:
public Boolean verifyErrorMessage(string errorMessage)
{
Boolean result= false;
try
{
repo.Gmail.ErrorMessage.InnerText.ToString();
if(errorMessage.Trim().Equals(errorMessageReceived.Trim()))
{
result=true;
}
}
catch(Exception e)
{
Report.Error(e.Message);
}
return result;
}

Related

Unnecessary null check in mapstruct

I'm using mapstruct in my project, and recently went to add some 'mutation analysis' using pitest.
The problem I have is that a mutant is created on some generated code, and I cannot fix my test to kill it since this is concerning null check generated by mapstruct, that are unreacheable.
ie, if I have the following mapper :
#Mapper
public abstract class MyMapper {
#Mapping(source= "someInnerObject.field", target="someField")
public abstract Bar toBar(Foo foo);
}
Mapstruck will generate something like this :
public class MyMapperImpl extends MyMapper {
#Override
public Bar toBar(Foo foo) {
if(foo == null) {
return null; // reacheable code, all is fine here.
}
Bar bar = new Bar();
bar.setSomeField(fooSomeField(foo))
return bar;
}
private String fooSomeField(Foo foo) {
if (foo == null) {
return null; // Unreacheable code, already tested in public method.
}
SomeInnerObject innerObject = foo.getSomeInnerObject()
if(innerObject == null) {
return null; // reacheable code, no problem here
}
String field = o.getField();
if(field == null) {
return null; // reacheable, no problem here.
}
return field;
}
}
As we can see, mapstruct generates a null check that is unreacheable, making it impossible to cover those line in test. The mutation analyser tries to return "" instead of null on the unreacheable line, and therefore, the mutant is never detected by my tests. This leads makes it impossible to get 100% code coverage and 100% mutation coverage.
I don't think excluding this generated code from the coverage or the mutation analysis would be a good choice, since the generated code reflect behavior that is coded as annotations in the mapper : So we would like to make sure these behaviors are correctly covered in tests.
Do someone here had the same problem, or any suggestion ?
I tried many different mapper config to get rid of the unreacheable line without success (unless I just disable all null checks, which would change my application logic).
The way MapStruct generates code doesn't allow us to skip the null check in the private method.
You can try raising an issue in the MapStruct project. However, I am not sure that it is worth spending time on skipping this null check. The JIT will in any case remove that check during runtime.
The topic about 100% code coverage and 100% mutation coverage is a topic for discussion that will lead to closing this question.

How can I return my MVC4 partial view as json and is it a good thing to do?

I am trying to clean up my code. I have a grid screen that gets refreshed with the following:
public ActionResult Details(string pk)
{
IEnumerable<ContentDetail> model = null;
try
{
model = _content.Details(pk);
if (model.Count() > 0)
{
return PartialView(getView(pk) + "Details", model);
}
}
catch (Exception e)
{
log(e);
}
return Content("No records found");
}
All the rest of my code uses json and I would like to return something like this:
public JsonResult JsonDetails(string pk)
But what should I do about the PartialView? I can't find anything about how to do this. Also is there any advantage / disadvantage to doing this? I was thinking if the code fails then I would return something like the following which the new ASP MVC4 code uses:
return Json(new { errors = GetErrorsFromModelState() });
Can someone help me with this? I'm looking to find any suggestions in particular for MVC4.
I've previously used the approach outlined in this answer, which was successful for me.
I can't think of any disadvantages of returning HTML within JSON, although the payload would likely be much larger than if you were returning data alone.
An alternative would be to return the model as JSON, and use a templating library, e.g. Handlebars.js, to generate the markup on the client. This is a common approach in single page applications.
Your idea around returning errors is good. GetErrorsFromModelState is only used where there are validation errors in the model state - in the example above, you're not performing any validation that would require you to use this method. So you'd probably want to output some friendly message within your catch-block, e.g.
try
{
...
}
catch (Exception e)
{
log(e);
return Json(new { errors = "An error occurred, please try again later" });
}
I've used the code from this answer before and it worked out great for me, I haven't tried returning specific errors, but it is possible to access controller.ModelState to check.

Custom Check in policy in TFS?

We have some xml files in the our project and whenever we check-in these xml files into TFS, We have make sure before checking-in that we have added those xml files to proprietary application.
Now the new employees more often forget to add files into proprietary application before check-in and this is getting serious...
We want kinda confirmation dialog (a reminder) asking the developers if they have added the xml files into the app. If yes then check-in otherwise keep it checkedout...
Please suggest if such thing is possible and any relevant code or links will be really appreciated.
It's not appropriate to raise UI in a custom check-in policy - the lifecycle of a check-in policy is very short, and they will be evaluated frequently and not necessarily in a UI context or on the UI thread.
Can you determine programmatically whether the appropriate XML files are being checked in? If so, you could create a custom check-in policy that fails if the XML files are not pended for add.
Gated Check-in may be the best solution to this problem: does the build fail if these XML files do not exist - or would unit tests fail if these files are missing? If so, this is a perfect candidate for Gated Check-in, which will prevent these check-ins from occurring.
I would create a custom build template that checks for these xml files. Make it a gated check-in and you've got your solution.
The Evaluate method is supposed to be quick and should not show UI, but there is an event on the policy that triggers when the user interacts with the policy called Activate, this is a good moment to show UI and communicate with the policy. You could do something like this:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Text;
namespace JesseHouwing.CheckinPolicies
{
using System.Windows.Forms;
using Microsoft.TeamFoundation.Client.Reporting;
using Microsoft.TeamFoundation.VersionControl.Client;
[Serializable]
public class ConfirmPolicy :PolicyBase
{
private AffectedTeamProjectsEventHandler _affectedTeamProjectsEventHandler;
private EventHandler _checkedPendingChangesEventHandler;
public ConfirmPolicy()
{
}
public void StatusChanged()
{
_userconfirmed = false;
OnPolicyStateChanged(Evaluate());
}
public override void Initialize(IPendingCheckin pendingCheckin)
{
_affectedTeamProjectsEventHandler = (sender, e) => StatusChanged();
_checkedPendingChangesEventHandler = (sender, e) => StatusChanged();
base.Initialize(pendingCheckin);
_userconfirmed = false;
pendingCheckin.PendingChanges.AffectedTeamProjectsChanged += _affectedTeamProjectsEventHandler;
pendingCheckin.PendingChanges.CheckedPendingChangesChanged += _checkedPendingChangesEventHandler;
}
protected override void OnPolicyStateChanged(PolicyFailure[] failures)
{
_userconfirmed = false;
base.OnPolicyStateChanged(Evaluate());
}
public override void Activate(PolicyFailure failure)
{
if (MessageBox.Show("Confirm the policy?", "Policy Check", MessageBoxButtons.YesNo) == DialogResult.Yes)
{
_userconfirmed = true;
base.OnPolicyStateChanged(Evaluate());
}
}
public override PolicyFailure[] Evaluate()
{
if (_userconfirmed == true)
{
return new PolicyFailure[0];
}
else
{
return new PolicyFailure[]{new PolicyFailure("User must confirm", this)};
}
}
public override string Description
{
get { throw new NotImplementedException(); }
}
public override bool Edit(IPolicyEditArgs policyEditArgs)
{
return true;
}
public override string Type
{
get
{
return "User Confirm";
}
}
public override string TypeDescription
{
get
{
return "User Confirm";
}
}
public override void Dispose()
{
this.PendingCheckin.PendingChanges.AffectedTeamProjectsChanged -= _affectedTeamProjectsEventHandler;
this.PendingCheckin.PendingChanges.CheckedPendingChangesChanged -= _checkedPendingChangesEventHandler;
base.Dispose();
}
}
}
I haven't tested this exact code yet, it might need some tweaking, but this is the general thing to do. Right now it triggers on a change in the files being checked in, but you can subscribe to any of the other events as well (work item changes) or trigger your own evaluation of the project each time Evaluate is called.
Or you can just trigger the confirm once per checkin cycle. it's all up to you. You could even do a "Click to Dismiss" and skip the Messagebox altogether. Just set _userConfirmed=true and fire the PolicyStateChanged event.

ASP.NET MVC - Proper way to handle ajax actions with no return object

I have a controller action that does some work in the database and then exits when it's finished. This action is being called via jQuery's ajax function with the dataType set to 'json'.
If I set the return type of the action to void, everything will function just fine except Firefox will show an error in the console that says: "no element found".
It makes sense that Firefox would throw this error if it was expecting XML to come back. However, even when I change the dataType property of the ajax call to "text", I still receive the error. In order to get rid of the error with the return type void, I would have to set the Response's ContentType to "text/html". Or I could set the return type to JsonResult and return a new [empty] JsonResult object.
I'm sure there are several ways I can make this error go away, but I wanted to know the proper way to handle actions with no return values being called via ajax.
If it matters, I'm also using the async controller action pattern.
public void DoSomethingAsync(SomeJsonObjectForModelBinding model)
{
// do some database things
}
public void DoSomethingCompleted()
{
// nothing to do...
// what should my return type be?
// do I need to set the content type here?
}
I know this doesn't exactly answer your question, but I would argue that you should always have a return value coming back from an AJAX or web service call. Even if only to tell you that the operation was successful, or otherwise return the error (message) back to you.
I often define a class like this:
public class JsonResultData
{
private bool _success = true;
public bool Success
{
get { return _success; }
set { _success = value; }
}
public object Value { get; set; }
public List<string> Errors { get; set; }
public JsonResultData()
{
this.Errors = new List<string>();
}
}
And then use it to return data or any other call meta data in the JsonResultData wrapper like so:
return new JsonResult {
Data = new JsonResultData { Value = returnValue, Success = true }
};
I can't comment because of my reputation but I still wanted to contribute to clear the confusion in Kon's answer.
In an application I caught all exceptions within an ActionMethod, set an HttpStatusCode and added an error message to the response. I extracted the message in the Ajax error function and showed it to the user.
Everything worked out fine until the application got put on the staging server, who had some kind of settings that did not allow a return message within an erroneous response. Instead some standard Html was transmitted resulting in a JS error processing the response.
In the end I had to rewrite all my exception handling returning my application errors as successful Ajax call (which it actually is) and then differ within the Ajax success function, just the way it should be.
You should not mix system-level and application-level feedback. You may not be able to control the system-level feedback the way your application needs.

How do I prevent multiple form submission in .NET MVC without using Javascript?

I want to prevent users submitting forms multiple times in .NET MVC. I've tried several methods using Javascript but have had difficulties getting it to work in all browsers. So, how can I prevent this in my controller? It there some way that multiple submissions can be detected?
Updated answer for ASP.NET Core MVC (.NET Core & .NET 5.0)
Update note: Remember ASP.NET Core is still called "Core" in .NET 5.0.
I'm going to stick to the least-impact use case like before, where you're only adorning those controller actions that you specifically want to prevent duplicate requests on. If you want to have this filter run on every request, or want to use async, there are other options. See this article for more details.
The new form tag helper now automatically includes the AntiForgeryToken so you no longer need to manually add that to your view.
Create a new ActionFilterAttribute like this example. You can do many additional things with this, for example including a time delay check to make sure that even if the user presents two different tokens, they aren't submitting multiple times per minute.
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class | AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = false)]
public class PreventDuplicateRequestAttribute : ActionFilterAttribute {
public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext context) {
if (context.HttpContext.Request.HasFormContentType && context.HttpContext.Request.Form.ContainsKey("__RequestVerificationToken")) {
var currentToken = context.HttpContext.Request.Form["__RequestVerificationToken"].ToString();
var lastToken = context.HttpContext.Session.GetString("LastProcessedToken");
if (lastToken == currentToken) {
context.ModelState.AddModelError(string.Empty, "Looks like you accidentally submitted the same form twice.");
}
else {
context.HttpContext.Session.SetString("LastProcessedToken", currentToken);
}
}
}
}
By request, I also wrote an asynchronous version which can be found here.
Here's a contrived usage example of the custom PreventDuplicateRequest attribute.
[HttpPost]
[ValidateAntiForgeryToken]
[PreventDuplicateRequest]
public IActionResult Create(InputModel input) {
if (ModelState.IsValid) {
// ... do something with input
return RedirectToAction(nameof(SomeAction));
}
// ... repopulate bad input model data into a fresh viewmodel
return View(viewModel);
}
A note on testing: simply hitting back in a browser does not use the same AntiForgeryToken. On faster computers where you can't physically double click the button twice, you'll need to use a tool like Fiddler to replay your request with the same token multiple times.
A note on setup: Core MVC does not have sessions enabled by default. You'll need to add the Microsoft.AspNet.Session package to your project, and configure your Startup.cs properly. Please read this article for more details.
Short version of Session setup is:
In Startup.ConfigureServices() you need to add:
services.AddDistributedMemoryCache();
services.AddSession();
In Startup.Configure() you need to add (before app.UseMvc() !!):
app.UseSession();
Original answer for ASP.NET MVC (.NET Framework 4.x)
First, make sure you're using the AntiForgeryToken on your form.
Then you can make a custom ActionFilter:
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class | AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = true)]
public class PreventDuplicateRequestAttribute : ActionFilterAttribute {
public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) {
if (HttpContext.Current.Request["__RequestVerificationToken"] == null)
return;
var currentToken = HttpContext.Current.Request["__RequestVerificationToken"].ToString();
if (HttpContext.Current.Session["LastProcessedToken"] == null) {
HttpContext.Current.Session["LastProcessedToken"] = currentToken;
return;
}
lock (HttpContext.Current.Session["LastProcessedToken"]) {
var lastToken = HttpContext.Current.Session["LastProcessedToken"].ToString();
if (lastToken == currentToken) {
filterContext.Controller.ViewData.ModelState.AddModelError("", "Looks like you accidentally tried to double post.");
return;
}
HttpContext.Current.Session["LastProcessedToken"] = currentToken;
}
}
}
And on your controller action you just...
[HttpPost]
[ValidateAntiForgeryToken]
[PreventDuplicateRequest]
public ActionResult CreatePost(InputModel input) {
...
}
You'll notice this doesn't prevent the request altogether. Instead it returns an error in the modelstate, so when your action checks if ModelState.IsValid then it will see that it is not, and will return with your normal error handling.
I've tried several methods using Javascript but have had difficulties getting it to work in all browsers
Have you tried using jquery?
$('#myform').submit(function() {
$(this).find(':submit').attr('disabled', 'disabled');
});
This should take care of the browser differences.
Just to complete the answer of #Darin, if you want to handle the client validation (if the form has required fields), you can check if there's input validation error before disabling the submit button :
$('#myform').submit(function () {
if ($(this).find('.input-validation-error').length == 0) {
$(this).find(':submit').attr('disabled', 'disabled');
}
});
What if we use $(this).valid()?
$('form').submit(function () {
if ($(this).valid()) {
$(this).find(':submit').attr('disabled', 'disabled');
}
});
Strategy
The truth is that you need several lines of attack for this problem:
The Post/Redirect/Get (PRG) pattern is not enough by itself. Still, it should always be used to provide the user with good experiences when using back, refresh, etc.
Using JavaScript to prevent the user from clicking the submit button multiple times is a must because it provides a much less jarring user experience compared to server-side solutions.
Blocking duplicate posts solely on the client side doesn't protect against bad actors and does not help with transient connection problems. (What if your first request made it to the server but the response did not make it back to the client, causing your browser to automatically resend the request?)
I'm not going to cover PRG, but here are my answers for the other two topics. They build upon the other answers here. FYI I'm using .NET Core 3.1.
Client-Side
Assuming you are using jQuery validation, I believe this is the cleanest/most efficient way to prevent your form submit button from being double-clicked. Note that submitHandler is only called after validation has passed, so there is no need to re-validate.
$submitButton = $('#submitButton');
$('#mainForm').data('validator').settings.submitHandler = function (form) {
form.submit();
$submitButton.prop('disabled', true);
};
An alternative to disabling the submit button is to show an overlay in front of the form during submission to 1) block any further interaction with the form and 2) communicate that the page is "doing something." See this article for more detail.
Server-Side
I started off with Jim Yarbro's great answer above, but then I noticed Mark Butler's answer pointing out how Jim's method fails if someone submits forms via multiple browser tabs (because each tab has a different token and posts from different tabs can be interlaced). I confirmed that such a problem really does exist and then decided to upgrade from tracking just the last token to tracking the last x tokens.
To facilitate that, I made a couple of helper classes: one for storing the last x tokens and one for making it easy to store/retrieve objects to/from session storage. The main code now checks that the current token is not found in the token history. Other than that, the code is pretty much the same. I just made some little tweaks to suit my tastes. I included both the regular and asynchronous versions. The full code is below, but these are the critical lines:
var history = session.Get<RotatingHistory<string>>(HistoryKey) ?? new RotatingHistory<string>(HistoryCapacity);
if (history.Contains(token))
{
context.ModelState.AddModelError("", DuplicateSubmissionErrorMessage);
}
else
{
history.Add(token);
}
Sadly, the fatal flaw of this approach is that the feedback from the first post (before any duplicates) gets lost. A better (but much more complex) solution would be to store the result of each unique request by GUID, and then handle duplicate requests by not only skipping doing the work again but also returning the same result from the first request, giving the user a seamless experience. This thorough article detailing Air BnB's methods of avoiding duplicate payments will give you an idea of the concepts.
PreventDuplicateFormSubmissionAttribute.cs
using System;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http;
using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Filters;
// This class provides an attribute for controller actions that flags duplicate form submissions
// by adding a model error if the request's verification token has already been seen on a prior
// form submission.
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Class | AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = false)]
public class PreventDuplicateFormSubmissionAttribute: ActionFilterAttribute
{
const string TokenKey = "__RequestVerificationToken";
const string HistoryKey = "RequestVerificationTokenHistory";
const int HistoryCapacity = 5;
const string DuplicateSubmissionErrorMessage =
"Your request was received more than once (either due to a temporary problem with the network or a " +
"double button press). Any submissions after the first one have been rejected, but the status of the " +
"first one is unclear. It may or may not have succeeded. Please check elsewhere to verify that your " +
"request had the intended effect. You may need to resubmit it.";
public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext context)
{
HttpRequest request = context.HttpContext.Request;
if (request.HasFormContentType && request.Form.ContainsKey(TokenKey))
{
string token = request.Form[TokenKey].ToString();
ISession session = context.HttpContext.Session;
var history = session.Get<RotatingHistory<string>>(HistoryKey) ?? new RotatingHistory<string>(HistoryCapacity);
if (history.Contains(token))
{
context.ModelState.AddModelError("", DuplicateSubmissionErrorMessage);
}
else
{
history.Add(token);
session.Put(HistoryKey, history);
}
}
}
public override async Task OnActionExecutionAsync(ActionExecutingContext context, ActionExecutionDelegate next)
{
HttpRequest request = context.HttpContext.Request;
if (request.HasFormContentType && request.Form.ContainsKey(TokenKey))
{
string token = request.Form[TokenKey].ToString();
ISession session = context.HttpContext.Session;
await session.LoadAsync();
var history = session.Get<RotatingHistory<string>>(HistoryKey) ?? new RotatingHistory<string>(HistoryCapacity);
if (history.Contains(token))
{
context.ModelState.AddModelError("", DuplicateSubmissionErrorMessage);
}
else
{
history.Add(token);
session.Put(HistoryKey, history);
await session.CommitAsync();
}
await next();
}
}
}
RotatingHistory.cs
using System.Linq;
// This class stores the last x items in an array. Adding a new item overwrites the oldest item
// if there is no more empty space. For the purpose of being JSON-serializable, its data is
// stored via public properties and it has a parameterless constructor.
public class RotatingHistory<T>
{
public T[] Items { get; set; }
public int Index { get; set; }
public RotatingHistory() {}
public RotatingHistory(int capacity)
{
Items = new T[capacity];
}
public void Add(T item)
{
Items[Index] = item;
Index = ++Index % Items.Length;
}
public bool Contains(T item)
{
return Items.Contains(item);
}
}
SessonExtensions.cs
using System.Text.Json;
using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http;
// This class is for storing (serializable) objects in session storage and retrieving them from it.
public static class SessonExtensions
{
public static void Put<T>(this ISession session, string key, T value) where T : class
{
session.SetString(key, JsonSerializer.Serialize(value));
}
public static T Get<T>(this ISession session, string key) where T : class
{
string s = session.GetString(key);
return s == null ? null : JsonSerializer.Deserialize<T>(s);
}
}
You could include a hidden (random or counter) value in the form post, a controller could track these values in an 'open' list or something similar; every time your controller hands out a form it embeds a value, which it tracks allowing one post use of it.
In its self, no, however depending on what the controller is actually doing, you should be able to work out a way.
Is a record being created in the database that you can check for to see if they've already submitted the form?
Just add this code at the end of your page. I am using "jquery-3.3.1.min.js" and "bootstrap 4.3.1"
<script type="text/javascript">
$('form').submit(function () {
if ($(this).valid()) {
$(this).find(':submit').attr('disabled', 'disabled');
}
});
</script>
Use the Post/Redirect/Get design pattern.
PS:
It looks to me that the answer by Jim Yarbro could have a fundamental flaw in that the __RequestVerificationToken stored in the HttpContext.Current.Session["LastProcessedToken"] will be replaced when a second form is submitted (from say another browser window). At this point, it is possible to re-submit the first form without it being recognized as a duplicate submission. For the proposed model to work, wouldn’t a history of __RequestVerificationToken be required? This doesn't seem feasible.
Dont reinvent the wheel :)
Use the Post/Redirect/Get design pattern.
Here you can find a question and an answer giving some suggestions on how to implement it in ASP.NET MVC.
You can also pass some sort of token in a hidden field and validate this in the controller.
Or you work with redirects after submitting values. But this get's difficult if you take heavily advantage of ajax.
This works on every browser
document.onkeydown = function () {
switch (event.keyCode) {
case 116: //F5 button
event.returnValue = false;
event.keyCode = 0;
return false;
case 82: //R button
if (event.ctrlKey) {
event.returnValue = false;
event.keyCode = 0;
return false;
}
}
}
You can do this by creating some sort of static entry flag that is user specific, or specific to whatever way you want to protect the resource. I use a ConcurrentDictionary to track entrance. The key is basically the name of the resource I'm protecting combined with the User ID. The trick is figuring out how to block the request when you know it's currently processing.
public async Task<ActionResult> SlowAction()
{
if(!CanEnterResource(nameof(SlowAction)) return new HttpStatusCodeResult(204);
try
{
// Do slow process
return new SlowProcessActionResult();
}
finally
{
ExitedResource(nameof(SlowAction));
}
}
Returning a 204 is a response to the double-click request that will do nothing on the browser side. When the slow process is done, the browser will receive the correct response for the original request and act accordingly.
Use this simple jquery input field and will work awesomely even if you have multiple submit buttons in a single form.
$('input[type=submit]').click(function () {
var clickedBtn = $(this)
setTimeout(function () {
clickedBtn.attr('disabled', 'disabled');
}, 1);
});

Resources