483 lines
19 KiB
Markdown
483 lines
19 KiB
Markdown
|
# Googletest Primer
|
||
|
|
||
|
## Introduction: Why googletest?
|
||
|
|
||
|
*googletest* helps you write better C++ tests.
|
||
|
|
||
|
googletest is a testing framework developed by the Testing Technology team with
|
||
|
Google's specific requirements and constraints in mind. Whether you work on
|
||
|
Linux, Windows, or a Mac, if you write C++ code, googletest can help you. And it
|
||
|
supports *any* kind of tests, not just unit tests.
|
||
|
|
||
|
So what makes a good test, and how does googletest fit in? We believe:
|
||
|
|
||
|
1. Tests should be *independent* and *repeatable*. It's a pain to debug a test
|
||
|
that succeeds or fails as a result of other tests. googletest isolates the
|
||
|
tests by running each of them on a different object. When a test fails,
|
||
|
googletest allows you to run it in isolation for quick debugging.
|
||
|
2. Tests should be well *organized* and reflect the structure of the tested
|
||
|
code. googletest groups related tests into test suites that can share data
|
||
|
and subroutines. This common pattern is easy to recognize and makes tests
|
||
|
easy to maintain. Such consistency is especially helpful when people switch
|
||
|
projects and start to work on a new code base.
|
||
|
3. Tests should be *portable* and *reusable*. Google has a lot of code that is
|
||
|
platform-neutral; its tests should also be platform-neutral. googletest
|
||
|
works on different OSes, with different compilers, with or without
|
||
|
exceptions, so googletest tests can work with a variety of configurations.
|
||
|
4. When tests fail, they should provide as much *information* about the problem
|
||
|
as possible. googletest doesn't stop at the first test failure. Instead, it
|
||
|
only stops the current test and continues with the next. You can also set up
|
||
|
tests that report non-fatal failures after which the current test continues.
|
||
|
Thus, you can detect and fix multiple bugs in a single run-edit-compile
|
||
|
cycle.
|
||
|
5. The testing framework should liberate test writers from housekeeping chores
|
||
|
and let them focus on the test *content*. googletest automatically keeps
|
||
|
track of all tests defined, and doesn't require the user to enumerate them
|
||
|
in order to run them.
|
||
|
6. Tests should be *fast*. With googletest, you can reuse shared resources
|
||
|
across tests and pay for the set-up/tear-down only once, without making
|
||
|
tests depend on each other.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Since googletest is based on the popular xUnit architecture, you'll feel right
|
||
|
at home if you've used JUnit or PyUnit before. If not, it will take you about 10
|
||
|
minutes to learn the basics and get started. So let's go!
|
||
|
|
||
|
## Beware of the nomenclature
|
||
|
|
||
|
{: .callout .note}
|
||
|
_Note:_ There might be some confusion arising from different definitions of the
|
||
|
terms _Test_, _Test Case_ and _Test Suite_, so beware of misunderstanding these.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Historically, googletest started to use the term _Test Case_ for grouping
|
||
|
related tests, whereas current publications, including International Software
|
||
|
Testing Qualifications Board ([ISTQB](http://www.istqb.org/)) materials and
|
||
|
various textbooks on software quality, use the term
|
||
|
_[Test Suite][istqb test suite]_ for this.
|
||
|
|
||
|
The related term _Test_, as it is used in googletest, corresponds to the term
|
||
|
_[Test Case][istqb test case]_ of ISTQB and others.
|
||
|
|
||
|
The term _Test_ is commonly of broad enough sense, including ISTQB's definition
|
||
|
of _Test Case_, so it's not much of a problem here. But the term _Test Case_ as
|
||
|
was used in Google Test is of contradictory sense and thus confusing.
|
||
|
|
||
|
googletest recently started replacing the term _Test Case_ with _Test Suite_.
|
||
|
The preferred API is *TestSuite*. The older TestCase API is being slowly
|
||
|
deprecated and refactored away.
|
||
|
|
||
|
So please be aware of the different definitions of the terms:
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
Meaning | googletest Term | [ISTQB](http://www.istqb.org/) Term
|
||
|
:----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | :---------------------- | :----------------------------------
|
||
|
Exercise a particular program path with specific input values and verify the results | [TEST()](#simple-tests) | [Test Case][istqb test case]
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
[istqb test case]: http://glossary.istqb.org/en/search/test%20case
|
||
|
[istqb test suite]: http://glossary.istqb.org/en/search/test%20suite
|
||
|
|
||
|
## Basic Concepts
|
||
|
|
||
|
When using googletest, you start by writing *assertions*, which are statements
|
||
|
that check whether a condition is true. An assertion's result can be *success*,
|
||
|
*nonfatal failure*, or *fatal failure*. If a fatal failure occurs, it aborts the
|
||
|
current function; otherwise the program continues normally.
|
||
|
|
||
|
*Tests* use assertions to verify the tested code's behavior. If a test crashes
|
||
|
or has a failed assertion, then it *fails*; otherwise it *succeeds*.
|
||
|
|
||
|
A *test suite* contains one or many tests. You should group your tests into test
|
||
|
suites that reflect the structure of the tested code. When multiple tests in a
|
||
|
test suite need to share common objects and subroutines, you can put them into a
|
||
|
*test fixture* class.
|
||
|
|
||
|
A *test program* can contain multiple test suites.
|
||
|
|
||
|
We'll now explain how to write a test program, starting at the individual
|
||
|
assertion level and building up to tests and test suites.
|
||
|
|
||
|
## Assertions
|
||
|
|
||
|
googletest assertions are macros that resemble function calls. You test a class
|
||
|
or function by making assertions about its behavior. When an assertion fails,
|
||
|
googletest prints the assertion's source file and line number location, along
|
||
|
with a failure message. You may also supply a custom failure message which will
|
||
|
be appended to googletest's message.
|
||
|
|
||
|
The assertions come in pairs that test the same thing but have different effects
|
||
|
on the current function. `ASSERT_*` versions generate fatal failures when they
|
||
|
fail, and **abort the current function**. `EXPECT_*` versions generate nonfatal
|
||
|
failures, which don't abort the current function. Usually `EXPECT_*` are
|
||
|
preferred, as they allow more than one failure to be reported in a test.
|
||
|
However, you should use `ASSERT_*` if it doesn't make sense to continue when the
|
||
|
assertion in question fails.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Since a failed `ASSERT_*` returns from the current function immediately,
|
||
|
possibly skipping clean-up code that comes after it, it may cause a space leak.
|
||
|
Depending on the nature of the leak, it may or may not be worth fixing - so keep
|
||
|
this in mind if you get a heap checker error in addition to assertion errors.
|
||
|
|
||
|
To provide a custom failure message, simply stream it into the macro using the
|
||
|
`<<` operator or a sequence of such operators. See the following example, using
|
||
|
the [`ASSERT_EQ` and `EXPECT_EQ`](reference/assertions.md#EXPECT_EQ) macros to
|
||
|
verify value equality:
|
||
|
|
||
|
```c++
|
||
|
ASSERT_EQ(x.size(), y.size()) << "Vectors x and y are of unequal length";
|
||
|
|
||
|
for (int i = 0; i < x.size(); ++i) {
|
||
|
EXPECT_EQ(x[i], y[i]) << "Vectors x and y differ at index " << i;
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
```
|
||
|
|
||
|
Anything that can be streamed to an `ostream` can be streamed to an assertion
|
||
|
macro--in particular, C strings and `string` objects. If a wide string
|
||
|
(`wchar_t*`, `TCHAR*` in `UNICODE` mode on Windows, or `std::wstring`) is
|
||
|
streamed to an assertion, it will be translated to UTF-8 when printed.
|
||
|
|
||
|
GoogleTest provides a collection of assertions for verifying the behavior of
|
||
|
your code in various ways. You can check Boolean conditions, compare values
|
||
|
based on relational operators, verify string values, floating-point values, and
|
||
|
much more. There are even assertions that enable you to verify more complex
|
||
|
states by providing custom predicates. For the complete list of assertions
|
||
|
provided by GoogleTest, see the [Assertions Reference](reference/assertions.md).
|
||
|
|
||
|
## Simple Tests
|
||
|
|
||
|
To create a test:
|
||
|
|
||
|
1. Use the `TEST()` macro to define and name a test function. These are
|
||
|
ordinary C++ functions that don't return a value.
|
||
|
2. In this function, along with any valid C++ statements you want to include,
|
||
|
use the various googletest assertions to check values.
|
||
|
3. The test's result is determined by the assertions; if any assertion in the
|
||
|
test fails (either fatally or non-fatally), or if the test crashes, the
|
||
|
entire test fails. Otherwise, it succeeds.
|
||
|
|
||
|
```c++
|
||
|
TEST(TestSuiteName, TestName) {
|
||
|
... test body ...
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
```
|
||
|
|
||
|
`TEST()` arguments go from general to specific. The *first* argument is the name
|
||
|
of the test suite, and the *second* argument is the test's name within the test
|
||
|
suite. Both names must be valid C++ identifiers, and they should not contain any
|
||
|
underscores (`_`). A test's *full name* consists of its containing test suite
|
||
|
and its individual name. Tests from different test suites can have the same
|
||
|
individual name.
|
||
|
|
||
|
For example, let's take a simple integer function:
|
||
|
|
||
|
```c++
|
||
|
int Factorial(int n); // Returns the factorial of n
|
||
|
```
|
||
|
|
||
|
A test suite for this function might look like:
|
||
|
|
||
|
```c++
|
||
|
// Tests factorial of 0.
|
||
|
TEST(FactorialTest, HandlesZeroInput) {
|
||
|
EXPECT_EQ(Factorial(0), 1);
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
// Tests factorial of positive numbers.
|
||
|
TEST(FactorialTest, HandlesPositiveInput) {
|
||
|
EXPECT_EQ(Factorial(1), 1);
|
||
|
EXPECT_EQ(Factorial(2), 2);
|
||
|
EXPECT_EQ(Factorial(3), 6);
|
||
|
EXPECT_EQ(Factorial(8), 40320);
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
```
|
||
|
|
||
|
googletest groups the test results by test suites, so logically related tests
|
||
|
should be in the same test suite; in other words, the first argument to their
|
||
|
`TEST()` should be the same. In the above example, we have two tests,
|
||
|
`HandlesZeroInput` and `HandlesPositiveInput`, that belong to the same test
|
||
|
suite `FactorialTest`.
|
||
|
|
||
|
When naming your test suites and tests, you should follow the same convention as
|
||
|
for
|
||
|
[naming functions and classes](https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Function_Names).
|
||
|
|
||
|
**Availability**: Linux, Windows, Mac.
|
||
|
|
||
|
## Test Fixtures: Using the Same Data Configuration for Multiple Tests {#same-data-multiple-tests}
|
||
|
|
||
|
If you find yourself writing two or more tests that operate on similar data, you
|
||
|
can use a *test fixture*. This allows you to reuse the same configuration of
|
||
|
objects for several different tests.
|
||
|
|
||
|
To create a fixture:
|
||
|
|
||
|
1. Derive a class from `::testing::Test` . Start its body with `protected:`, as
|
||
|
we'll want to access fixture members from sub-classes.
|
||
|
2. Inside the class, declare any objects you plan to use.
|
||
|
3. If necessary, write a default constructor or `SetUp()` function to prepare
|
||
|
the objects for each test. A common mistake is to spell `SetUp()` as
|
||
|
**`Setup()`** with a small `u` - Use `override` in C++11 to make sure you
|
||
|
spelled it correctly.
|
||
|
4. If necessary, write a destructor or `TearDown()` function to release any
|
||
|
resources you allocated in `SetUp()` . To learn when you should use the
|
||
|
constructor/destructor and when you should use `SetUp()/TearDown()`, read
|
||
|
the [FAQ](faq.md#CtorVsSetUp).
|
||
|
5. If needed, define subroutines for your tests to share.
|
||
|
|
||
|
When using a fixture, use `TEST_F()` instead of `TEST()` as it allows you to
|
||
|
access objects and subroutines in the test fixture:
|
||
|
|
||
|
```c++
|
||
|
TEST_F(TestFixtureName, TestName) {
|
||
|
... test body ...
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
```
|
||
|
|
||
|
Like `TEST()`, the first argument is the test suite name, but for `TEST_F()`
|
||
|
this must be the name of the test fixture class. You've probably guessed: `_F`
|
||
|
is for fixture.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Unfortunately, the C++ macro system does not allow us to create a single macro
|
||
|
that can handle both types of tests. Using the wrong macro causes a compiler
|
||
|
error.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Also, you must first define a test fixture class before using it in a
|
||
|
`TEST_F()`, or you'll get the compiler error "`virtual outside class
|
||
|
declaration`".
|
||
|
|
||
|
For each test defined with `TEST_F()`, googletest will create a *fresh* test
|
||
|
fixture at runtime, immediately initialize it via `SetUp()`, run the test, clean
|
||
|
up by calling `TearDown()`, and then delete the test fixture. Note that
|
||
|
different tests in the same test suite have different test fixture objects, and
|
||
|
googletest always deletes a test fixture before it creates the next one.
|
||
|
googletest does **not** reuse the same test fixture for multiple tests. Any
|
||
|
changes one test makes to the fixture do not affect other tests.
|
||
|
|
||
|
As an example, let's write tests for a FIFO queue class named `Queue`, which has
|
||
|
the following interface:
|
||
|
|
||
|
```c++
|
||
|
template <typename E> // E is the element type.
|
||
|
class Queue {
|
||
|
public:
|
||
|
Queue();
|
||
|
void Enqueue(const E& element);
|
||
|
E* Dequeue(); // Returns NULL if the queue is empty.
|
||
|
size_t size() const;
|
||
|
...
|
||
|
};
|
||
|
```
|
||
|
|
||
|
First, define a fixture class. By convention, you should give it the name
|
||
|
`FooTest` where `Foo` is the class being tested.
|
||
|
|
||
|
```c++
|
||
|
class QueueTest : public ::testing::Test {
|
||
|
protected:
|
||
|
void SetUp() override {
|
||
|
q1_.Enqueue(1);
|
||
|
q2_.Enqueue(2);
|
||
|
q2_.Enqueue(3);
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
// void TearDown() override {}
|
||
|
|
||
|
Queue<int> q0_;
|
||
|
Queue<int> q1_;
|
||
|
Queue<int> q2_;
|
||
|
};
|
||
|
```
|
||
|
|
||
|
In this case, `TearDown()` is not needed since we don't have to clean up after
|
||
|
each test, other than what's already done by the destructor.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Now we'll write tests using `TEST_F()` and this fixture.
|
||
|
|
||
|
```c++
|
||
|
TEST_F(QueueTest, IsEmptyInitially) {
|
||
|
EXPECT_EQ(q0_.size(), 0);
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
TEST_F(QueueTest, DequeueWorks) {
|
||
|
int* n = q0_.Dequeue();
|
||
|
EXPECT_EQ(n, nullptr);
|
||
|
|
||
|
n = q1_.Dequeue();
|
||
|
ASSERT_NE(n, nullptr);
|
||
|
EXPECT_EQ(*n, 1);
|
||
|
EXPECT_EQ(q1_.size(), 0);
|
||
|
delete n;
|
||
|
|
||
|
n = q2_.Dequeue();
|
||
|
ASSERT_NE(n, nullptr);
|
||
|
EXPECT_EQ(*n, 2);
|
||
|
EXPECT_EQ(q2_.size(), 1);
|
||
|
delete n;
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
```
|
||
|
|
||
|
The above uses both `ASSERT_*` and `EXPECT_*` assertions. The rule of thumb is
|
||
|
to use `EXPECT_*` when you want the test to continue to reveal more errors after
|
||
|
the assertion failure, and use `ASSERT_*` when continuing after failure doesn't
|
||
|
make sense. For example, the second assertion in the `Dequeue` test is
|
||
|
`ASSERT_NE(n, nullptr)`, as we need to dereference the pointer `n` later, which
|
||
|
would lead to a segfault when `n` is `NULL`.
|
||
|
|
||
|
When these tests run, the following happens:
|
||
|
|
||
|
1. googletest constructs a `QueueTest` object (let's call it `t1`).
|
||
|
2. `t1.SetUp()` initializes `t1`.
|
||
|
3. The first test (`IsEmptyInitially`) runs on `t1`.
|
||
|
4. `t1.TearDown()` cleans up after the test finishes.
|
||
|
5. `t1` is destructed.
|
||
|
6. The above steps are repeated on another `QueueTest` object, this time
|
||
|
running the `DequeueWorks` test.
|
||
|
|
||
|
**Availability**: Linux, Windows, Mac.
|
||
|
|
||
|
## Invoking the Tests
|
||
|
|
||
|
`TEST()` and `TEST_F()` implicitly register their tests with googletest. So,
|
||
|
unlike with many other C++ testing frameworks, you don't have to re-list all
|
||
|
your defined tests in order to run them.
|
||
|
|
||
|
After defining your tests, you can run them with `RUN_ALL_TESTS()`, which
|
||
|
returns `0` if all the tests are successful, or `1` otherwise. Note that
|
||
|
`RUN_ALL_TESTS()` runs *all tests* in your link unit--they can be from different
|
||
|
test suites, or even different source files.
|
||
|
|
||
|
When invoked, the `RUN_ALL_TESTS()` macro:
|
||
|
|
||
|
* Saves the state of all googletest flags.
|
||
|
|
||
|
* Creates a test fixture object for the first test.
|
||
|
|
||
|
* Initializes it via `SetUp()`.
|
||
|
|
||
|
* Runs the test on the fixture object.
|
||
|
|
||
|
* Cleans up the fixture via `TearDown()`.
|
||
|
|
||
|
* Deletes the fixture.
|
||
|
|
||
|
* Restores the state of all googletest flags.
|
||
|
|
||
|
* Repeats the above steps for the next test, until all tests have run.
|
||
|
|
||
|
If a fatal failure happens the subsequent steps will be skipped.
|
||
|
|
||
|
{: .callout .important}
|
||
|
> IMPORTANT: You must **not** ignore the return value of `RUN_ALL_TESTS()`, or
|
||
|
> you will get a compiler error. The rationale for this design is that the
|
||
|
> automated testing service determines whether a test has passed based on its
|
||
|
> exit code, not on its stdout/stderr output; thus your `main()` function must
|
||
|
> return the value of `RUN_ALL_TESTS()`.
|
||
|
>
|
||
|
> Also, you should call `RUN_ALL_TESTS()` only **once**. Calling it more than
|
||
|
> once conflicts with some advanced googletest features (e.g., thread-safe
|
||
|
> [death tests](advanced.md#death-tests)) and thus is not supported.
|
||
|
|
||
|
**Availability**: Linux, Windows, Mac.
|
||
|
|
||
|
## Writing the main() Function
|
||
|
|
||
|
Most users should _not_ need to write their own `main` function and instead link
|
||
|
with `gtest_main` (as opposed to with `gtest`), which defines a suitable entry
|
||
|
point. See the end of this section for details. The remainder of this section
|
||
|
should only apply when you need to do something custom before the tests run that
|
||
|
cannot be expressed within the framework of fixtures and test suites.
|
||
|
|
||
|
If you write your own `main` function, it should return the value of
|
||
|
`RUN_ALL_TESTS()`.
|
||
|
|
||
|
You can start from this boilerplate:
|
||
|
|
||
|
```c++
|
||
|
#include "this/package/foo.h"
|
||
|
|
||
|
#include "gtest/gtest.h"
|
||
|
|
||
|
namespace my {
|
||
|
namespace project {
|
||
|
namespace {
|
||
|
|
||
|
// The fixture for testing class Foo.
|
||
|
class FooTest : public ::testing::Test {
|
||
|
protected:
|
||
|
// You can remove any or all of the following functions if their bodies would
|
||
|
// be empty.
|
||
|
|
||
|
FooTest() {
|
||
|
// You can do set-up work for each test here.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
~FooTest() override {
|
||
|
// You can do clean-up work that doesn't throw exceptions here.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
// If the constructor and destructor are not enough for setting up
|
||
|
// and cleaning up each test, you can define the following methods:
|
||
|
|
||
|
void SetUp() override {
|
||
|
// Code here will be called immediately after the constructor (right
|
||
|
// before each test).
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
void TearDown() override {
|
||
|
// Code here will be called immediately after each test (right
|
||
|
// before the destructor).
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
// Class members declared here can be used by all tests in the test suite
|
||
|
// for Foo.
|
||
|
};
|
||
|
|
||
|
// Tests that the Foo::Bar() method does Abc.
|
||
|
TEST_F(FooTest, MethodBarDoesAbc) {
|
||
|
const std::string input_filepath = "this/package/testdata/myinputfile.dat";
|
||
|
const std::string output_filepath = "this/package/testdata/myoutputfile.dat";
|
||
|
Foo f;
|
||
|
EXPECT_EQ(f.Bar(input_filepath, output_filepath), 0);
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
// Tests that Foo does Xyz.
|
||
|
TEST_F(FooTest, DoesXyz) {
|
||
|
// Exercises the Xyz feature of Foo.
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
|
||
|
} // namespace
|
||
|
} // namespace project
|
||
|
} // namespace my
|
||
|
|
||
|
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
|
||
|
::testing::InitGoogleTest(&argc, argv);
|
||
|
return RUN_ALL_TESTS();
|
||
|
}
|
||
|
```
|
||
|
|
||
|
The `::testing::InitGoogleTest()` function parses the command line for
|
||
|
googletest flags, and removes all recognized flags. This allows the user to
|
||
|
control a test program's behavior via various flags, which we'll cover in the
|
||
|
[AdvancedGuide](advanced.md). You **must** call this function before calling
|
||
|
`RUN_ALL_TESTS()`, or the flags won't be properly initialized.
|
||
|
|
||
|
On Windows, `InitGoogleTest()` also works with wide strings, so it can be used
|
||
|
in programs compiled in `UNICODE` mode as well.
|
||
|
|
||
|
But maybe you think that writing all those `main` functions is too much work? We
|
||
|
agree with you completely, and that's why Google Test provides a basic
|
||
|
implementation of main(). If it fits your needs, then just link your test with
|
||
|
the `gtest_main` library and you are good to go.
|
||
|
|
||
|
{: .callout .note}
|
||
|
NOTE: `ParseGUnitFlags()` is deprecated in favor of `InitGoogleTest()`.
|
||
|
|
||
|
## Known Limitations
|
||
|
|
||
|
* Google Test is designed to be thread-safe. The implementation is thread-safe
|
||
|
on systems where the `pthreads` library is available. It is currently
|
||
|
_unsafe_ to use Google Test assertions from two threads concurrently on
|
||
|
other systems (e.g. Windows). In most tests this is not an issue as usually
|
||
|
the assertions are done in the main thread. If you want to help, you can
|
||
|
volunteer to implement the necessary synchronization primitives in
|
||
|
`gtest-port.h` for your platform.
|