Skip to main content

How to write unit-tests for async methods


All developer that works with .NET heard about Task, async, await – Task Parallel Library (TPL). Great library when we need to write code that runs in parallel.
With TPL, writing code that run in parallel is pretty simple. This is great, but of course, all code that run in parallel need to be tested also – unit tests. Do you know how you need to write unit tests for async calls?
I so pretty strange way of unit tests for async methods. Some of them were ugly and complicated. Why? Because the unit test method is a sync one and there we try to run and wait a response from an async call. This is why we can end up with something like this:
        [TestMethod]
        public void MoveFile_ExistingFile_ResultsFileMovedAndOriginalFileDeleted()
        {                        
            StorageFolder destinationFolder = null;
                        
            Task.Run(() => destinationFolder = 
                                CreateFolderAsync(_originalFolder).Result)
                                  .Wait();
            
            var fileToMove = StorageHelper.CreateFile(_originalFolder,FileName);

            Task.Run(() =>  _fileManipulator.MoveFileAsync(fileToMove, destinationFolder))
                                  .Wait();

            Assert.IsTrue(_fileManipulator.Exist(destinationFolder, FileName));
            Assert.IsFalse(_fileManipulator.Exist(_originalFolder, FileName));
        }   
or
        private void SaveContent(byte[] originalContent)
        {
            Task saveTask = Task.Run(() => _applicationFileManager
                                  .SaveAsync(FileName, originalContent));
            saveTask.Wait();

        }
What do you thing? Do you like to have in the unit tests calls to Task.Run(). Personal I don’t like this and for me is a big smell. Something we are doing wrong, we are missing something.
What we are missing is the way we are writing the unit test method. By default, when we are wring a unit test we define the unit test method in this way:
[TestMethod]
public void SomeTest() { }
This is okay for testing a sync call. But when testing async call we have more option. It would be nice to be able to have our test method as an async method. In this way we don’t need to call Task.Run().
The reality is that we can define a test method like this:
[TestMethod]
public async Task SomeTest() { }
Doing this we can call our async method as a normal method and test accordingly.
        [TestMethod]
        public async Task MoveFile_ExistingFile_ResultsFileMovedAndOriginalFileDeleted()
        {                      
            StorageFolder destinationFolder = null;
                     
           destinationFolder = await CreateFolderAsync(_originalFolder)
         
            var fileToMove = StorageHelper.CreateFile(_originalFolder,FileName);

            await _fileManipulator.MoveFileAsync(fileToMove, destinationFolder);

            Assert.IsTrue(_fileManipulator.Exist(destinationFolder, FileName));
            Assert.IsFalse(_fileManipulator.Exist(_originalFolder, FileName));
        }
This feature works only on Visual Studio 2012.
On Visual Studio 2010 we need to install a NuGet package called AsyncUnitTests-MSTest. This will allow us to use async and await in our unit test. We will need to replace the TestClass attribute with AsyncTestClass. This attribute is able to run normal tests also.

In this post we saw how easily we can run unit tests for async code, without having to hack our calls.

Comments

  1. Indeed, also NUnit (>= 2.6.2) and XUnit.net (>= 1.9) have support for async tests.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Windows Docker Containers can make WIN32 API calls, use COM and ASP.NET WebForms

After the last post , I received two interesting questions related to Docker and Windows. People were interested if we do Win32 API calls from a Docker container and if there is support for COM. WIN32 Support To test calls to WIN32 API, let’s try to populate SYSTEM_INFO class. [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)] public struct SYSTEM_INFO { public uint dwOemId; public uint dwPageSize; public uint lpMinimumApplicationAddress; public uint lpMaximumApplicationAddress; public uint dwActiveProcessorMask; public uint dwNumberOfProcessors; public uint dwProcessorType; public uint dwAllocationGranularity; public uint dwProcessorLevel; public uint dwProcessorRevision; } ... [DllImport("kernel32")] static extern void GetSystemInfo(ref SYSTEM_INFO pSI); ... SYSTEM_INFO pSI = new SYSTEM_INFO(

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine: threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=260882 for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration: TeamCity .NET 4.51 EF 6.0.2 VS2013 It see

Navigating Cloud Strategy after Azure Central US Region Outage

 Looking back, July 19, 2024, was challenging for customers using Microsoft Azure or Windows machines. Two major outages affected customers using CrowdStrike Falcon or Microsoft Azure computation resources in the Central US. These two outages affected many people and put many businesses on pause for a few hours or even days. The overlap of these two issues was a nightmare for travellers. In addition to blue screens in the airport terminals, they could not get additional information from the airport website, airline personnel, or the support line because they were affected by the outage in the Central US region or the CrowdStrike outage.   But what happened in reality? A faulty CrowdStrike update affected Windows computers globally, from airports and healthcare to small businesses, affecting over 8.5m computers. Even if the Falson Sensor software defect was identified and a fix deployed shortly after, the recovery took longer. In parallel with CrowdStrike, Microsoft provided a too