Min api unit & integration tests sample by fiyazbinhasan · Pull Request #26801 · dotnet/AspNetCore.Docs

fiyazbinhasan · 2022-08-22T20:54:57Z

contributes to #26352

@Rick-Anderson In my opinion, this could make a stand-alone comprehensive doc about writing unit and integration tests for minimal API apps. Please take a look at the sample. I've modified the existing todo-group sample to support the test cases. The sample could also be used to showcase the MapGroup,

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/asp-net-core-updates-in-dotnet-7-preview-4/#route-groups

Rick-Anderson · 2022-08-23T00:07:22Z

@captainsafia please assign a reviewer

captainsafia

@brunolins16 Do you want to give this a check?

captainsafia · 2022-08-29T15:53:30Z

@@ -0,0 +1,135 @@
+using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http.HttpResults;
+using todo_group;


Nit: We probably want to use PascalCase naming for this namespace.

brunolins16 · 2022-09-09T00:01:30Z

+
+namespace todo_group;
+
+public static class TodoEndpointsV2


What is the goal in add a V2?

V1 and V2 follow different patterns for accessing the underlying DB context. In V1 the context is directly injected into the endpoint whereas in V2 an additional abstraction (TodoService) is used to wrap the DB context. I think this is very common to use this abstraction (e.g. Repository pattern) and adopted in many applications to make the endpoint/controllers more testable. Rather than faking the context with an In-Memory implementation, we use a mock of a service. To show this, I've used Moq for mocking the TodoService in TodoMoqTests. Similarly for V1, I've used the In-Memory database approach found in TodoInMemoryTests

brunolins16 · 2022-09-09T00:05:26Z

@@ -6,11 +6,19 @@
    <ImplicitUsings>enable</ImplicitUsings>
    <RootNamespace>todo_group</RootNamespace>


Maybe rename the csproj to TodoGroup.csproj?

Also, we should update the namespace.

yes, agreed. Will do. @Rick-Anderson could you please verify that this sample has no additional references in the documentation? This was an existing sample that I found and modified. I'm not sure whether it will break anything somewhere

brunolins16 · 2022-09-09T00:07:27Z

+            var createdResult = (Created<Todo>)await TodoEndpointsV1.UpdateTodo(updatedTodo, context);
+            var notFoundResult = (NotFound)await TodoEndpointsV1.UpdateTodo(new Todo { Id = 2, Title = "Invalid Title" }, context);


What do you think about splitting the tests?

I think for documented examples and as a unit, this is ok. If I separate these out there will be three more test methods.

3 tests would be better.

I've added another fact just to check whether the todo is available inside the db,

TodoInMemoryTests.cs (When DbContext is injected)

[Fact] public async Task GetTodoReturnsNotFoundIfNotExists() { // Arrange await using var context = new MockDb().CreateDbContext(); // Act var notFoundResult = (NotFound)await TodoEndpointsV1.GetTodo(404, context); //Assert Assert.Equal(404, notFoundResult.StatusCode); }

TodoMoqTests.cs (When a service wrapper of the DbContext is injected)

[Fact] public async Task GetTodoReturnsNotFoundIfNotExists() { // Arrange var mock = new Mock<ITodoService>(); mock.Setup(m => m.Find(It.Is<int>(id => id == 404))) .ReturnsAsync((Todo?)null); // Act var notFoundResult = (NotFound)await TodoEndpointsV2.GetTodo(404, mock.Object); //Assert Assert.Equal(404, notFoundResult.StatusCode); }

brunolins16 · 2022-09-09T00:10:10Z

+   .AddEndpointFilter(async (context, next) =>
+   {
+       app.Logger.LogInformation("Accessing todo endpoints");
+       return await next(context);
+   });


Are we planning showcase filters here as well?

I think we can exclude filters here

fiyazbinhasan

@brunolins16 could you please review my comments

fiyazbinhasan · 2022-09-14T03:25:28Z

+
+namespace todo_group;
+
+public static class TodoEndpointsV2


V1 and V2 follow different patterns for accessing the underlying DB context. In V1 the context is directly injected into the endpoint whereas in V2 an additional abstraction (TodoService) is used to wrap the DB context. I think this is very common to use this abstraction (e.g. Repository pattern) and adopted in many applications to make the endpoint/controllers more testable. Rather than faking the context with an In-Memory implementation, we use a mock of a service. To show this, I've used Moq for mocking the TodoService in TodoMoqTests. Similarly for V1, I've used the In-Memory database approach found in TodoInMemoryTests

fiyazbinhasan · 2022-09-14T03:28:56Z

@@ -6,11 +6,19 @@
    <ImplicitUsings>enable</ImplicitUsings>
    <RootNamespace>todo_group</RootNamespace>


yes, agreed. Will do. @Rick-Anderson could you please verify that this sample has no additional references in the documentation? This was an existing sample that I found and modified. I'm not sure whether it will break anything somewhere

fiyazbinhasan · 2022-09-14T03:29:43Z

+   .AddEndpointFilter(async (context, next) =>
+   {
+       app.Logger.LogInformation("Accessing todo endpoints");
+       return await next(context);
+   });


I think we can exclude filters here

fiyazbinhasan · 2022-09-14T03:42:08Z

+            var createdResult = (Created<Todo>)await TodoEndpointsV1.UpdateTodo(updatedTodo, context);
+            var notFoundResult = (NotFound)await TodoEndpointsV1.UpdateTodo(new Todo { Id = 2, Title = "Invalid Title" }, context);


I think for documented examples and as a unit, this is ok. If I separate these out there will be three more test methods.

…ntegrationTests/TodoIntegrationTestsV1.cs Co-authored-by: Bruno Oliveira <brunolins16@users.noreply.github.com>

…ntegrationTests/TodoIntegrationTestsV2.cs Co-authored-by: Bruno Oliveira <brunolins16@users.noreply.github.com>

Rick-Anderson · 2022-09-16T05:18:16Z

-    <PackageReference Include="Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Sqlite" Version="6.0.7" />
-    <PackageReference Include="Swashbuckle.AspNetCore" Version="6.2.3" />
+    <PackageReference Include="Microsoft.AspNetCore.OpenApi" Version="7.0.0-preview.7.22376.6" />
+    <PackageReference Include="Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Design" Version="7.0.0-preview.7.22376.2">


Can you update and test with V 7 RC1?

sure, will do

packages are updated to RC1. Please check WebMinRouteGroup.csproj as the project namespace has been updated

…abase

Rick-Anderson · 2022-09-17T00:55:18Z

@fiyazbinhasan see gitignore
Don't we want the sln file for test projects?
sln files are ignored

Rick-Anderson · 2022-09-17T01:20:43Z

@brunolins16 this looks good so I'm going to merge once the .sln file is pushed - unless you have any changes needed.

fiyazbinhasan · 2022-09-17T06:18:36Z

@fiyazbinhasan see gitignore Don't we want the sln file for test projects? sln files are ignored

@Rick-Anderson moved both projects under MinApiTestsSample folder and added the solution file

Rick-Anderson · 2022-09-19T21:29:10Z

Nice work @fiyazbinhasan

fiyazbinhasan added 8 commits August 14, 2022 15:59

work

24e5aac

test sample

be92d77

work

cab37d0

work

a572e8d

work

698f853

work

7020213

unit and integration tests

985f7c5

Route group with RouteGroupBuilder

58844f7

Rick-Anderson mentioned this pull request Aug 25, 2022

Route groups #26819

Closed

3 tasks

captainsafia reviewed Aug 29, 2022

View reviewed changes

Rick-Anderson self-assigned this Sep 7, 2022

brunolins16 reviewed Sep 9, 2022

View reviewed changes

fiyazbinhasan commented Sep 14, 2022

View reviewed changes

fiyazbinhasan and others added 3 commits September 14, 2022 12:30

Update aspnetcore/fundamentals/minimal-apis/7.0-samples/MinApiTests/I…

e03d890

…ntegrationTests/TodoIntegrationTestsV1.cs Co-authored-by: Bruno Oliveira <brunolins16@users.noreply.github.com>

Update aspnetcore/fundamentals/minimal-apis/7.0-samples/MinApiTests/I…

c7eb033

…ntegrationTests/TodoIntegrationTestsV2.cs Co-authored-by: Bruno Oliveira <brunolins16@users.noreply.github.com>

namespace update

36c0db3

fiyazbinhasan requested review from Rick-Anderson and brunolins16 and removed request for Rick-Anderson September 16, 2022 04:34

Rick-Anderson reviewed Sep 16, 2022

View reviewed changes

fiyazbinhasan added 2 commits September 16, 2022 18:19

dotnet 7 rc1 packages update

aa0a6d9

common fact to unit test not found result when todo is not inside dat…

a44aca1

…abase

Rick-Anderson mentioned this pull request Sep 16, 2022

.NET 7: Code sample for Improved unit testability for minimal route handlers #26352

Closed

3 tasks

fiyazbinhasan added 2 commits September 17, 2022 03:48

minor refactoring

d67e14d

Update Program.cs

57e9ddb

Rick-Anderson mentioned this pull request Sep 17, 2022

.NET 7: MapGroup support for more extension methods #26549

Closed

move projects in a solution

f68a815

fiyazbinhasan added 2 commits September 17, 2022 13:29

bring back todo-group sample

073d72f

additional unit tests

2303e2e

Rick-Anderson merged commit 619e39c into dotnet:main Sep 19, 2022

Rick-Anderson mentioned this pull request Sep 22, 2022

Move Min api unit & integration tests sample to https://github.com/dotnet/AspNetCore.Docs.Samples #27072

Closed

		@@ -0,0 +1,135 @@
		using Microsoft.AspNetCore.Http.HttpResults;
		using todo_group;

		@@ -6,11 +6,19 @@
		<ImplicitUsings>enable</ImplicitUsings>
		<RootNamespace>todo_group</RootNamespace>

		var createdResult = (Created<Todo>)await TodoEndpointsV1.UpdateTodo(updatedTodo, context);
		var notFoundResult = (NotFound)await TodoEndpointsV1.UpdateTodo(new Todo { Id = 2, Title = "Invalid Title" }, context);

Conversation

fiyazbinhasan commented Aug 22, 2022 • edited by Rick-Anderson Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Rick-Anderson commented Aug 23, 2022

Uh oh!

captainsafia left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

fiyazbinhasan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Rick-Anderson commented Sep 17, 2022

Uh oh!

Rick-Anderson commented Sep 17, 2022

Uh oh!

fiyazbinhasan commented Sep 17, 2022

Uh oh!

Rick-Anderson commented Sep 19, 2022

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

fiyazbinhasan commented Aug 22, 2022 •

edited by Rick-Anderson

Loading