From crosseyedpenguin at cox.net  Fri Apr  1 08:15:42 2005
From: crosseyedpenguin at cox.net (Roger)
Date: Fri Apr  1 11:21:57 2005
Subject: [Jsconsole] Getting Started
Message-ID: <424D659E.2050906@cox.net>

Hi,

I have read the docs, installed the JSConsole package, and have run a 
few succesful tests from the Quick Start. But I need an example or two 
of how this tool is intended to be used.

My first thought was to load my test web page that loads a .js file with 
several new functions in need of testing. I expected to click on the 
FireFox Tools-JSConsole menu and have JSConsole come up knowing about my 
web page and the loaded Javascript files. This doesn't seem to happen.

JSConsole seems to want me to load the .js file, add some unit test code 
at the end, and then right-click, and choose run, and then look for 
error/success results in the Unit Test tab. However, I do not understand 
how my Javascript functions can access the HTML form text fields, radio 
buttons, etc. embedded in my web page. Also, how can I change the values 
of a web-page text field within my unit test.

A useful example for me would be to test a text field to verify a user 
entered an integer. So if my web-page had something like:
  <input type="text" name="myInteger" size="3" maxlength="3" value="" 
onBlur="return checkInt(this)">

Obviously I could test by passing an integer or non-integer strings and 
get results. But Javascript functions are often more complicated and 
access multiple form inputs. So is the idea to refactor Javascript code 
and test without accessing form inputs, and then write "simple" wrapper 
functions to gather form data and/or update form data? So I would write 
a wrapper for checkInt that looked like:
  function callCheckInt(this) {return checkInt(this.value);}
and then rewrite the onBlur to
  onBlur="return callCheckInt(this)"

Am I correct in that JSConsole knows nothing about the web page loaded 
at the time it is started?

Finally, is there a way to write and leave the test cases in the .js 
file? Something like:
  function a.....
  function b.....
  function c....
  testcase1...
  testcase2...
  testcase3...
Or do you just comment the test cases out?

Roger Haase

From zdev at noos.fr  Mon Apr  4 17:39:41 2005
From: zdev at noos.fr (Daniel Fournier)
Date: Mon Apr  4 10:48:28 2005
Subject: [Jsconsole] Getting Started
Message-ID: <425151AD.8010401@noos.fr>


Hi,

Unfortunately, JS Console doesn't run JS embedded in HTML pages. It has 
been developped to run standalone JS files.

You have to consider that input from your web page(s) are only input 
data. So just define a set of JS variables corresponding to samples of 
data that your web page user can input and test that set of variables 
with your validating functions.

In my opinion it's a good practice to decouple your JS logic and your 
your JS data input from HTML forms, using an intermediate function. That 
way, when you change something in the user interface (HTML forms), you 
just have to make corresponding adjustment in the intermediate 
functions, the main logic beeing as generic as possible.

>
> Am I correct in that JSConsole knows nothing about the web page loaded 
> at the time it is started?


Quite true.

>
> Finally, is there a way to write and leave the test cases in the .js 
> file? Something like:
>  


It depends whether you want to take advantage of the unit testing 
framework or not.
If you do, then just define a boolean global variable that you set to 
true when you want to have the unit tests run, or false otherwise. Any 
ASSERT function takes an argument to decide whether the unit test have 
to be run (see Unit testing doc), then passing your global variable as 
this argument, you can either run every ASSERT function you have 
inserted in your code, or bypass all (you can also combine this global 
variable with a specific boolean variable that would enable or not the 
asserting function).

But if you don't want to use the testing framework, then just surround 
your test cases with a conditional construct to run or not run them. For 
instance:

if (true)      //change to false to skip all tests
   {
   testcase1(arg0, arg1);
   testcase2(arg0, arg1);
   }

You can also have a more fine grain testing, isolating one or several 
test cases within conditional constructs.

There's a third way, my prefered. Just isolate all your testing 
functions in a specific file and import your "real" functions within it, 
using the __IMPORT__ function. That way, everything is clean and easy to 
modify and when your code is ready, you don't have to load the testing 
file and you avoid a (slight) processing overhead for the JS parsing 
engine.


Daniel Fournier
From crosseyedpenguin at cox.net  Mon Apr  4 11:11:09 2005
From: crosseyedpenguin at cox.net (Roger)
Date: Mon Apr  4 13:18:24 2005
Subject: [Jsconsole] Getting Started
In-Reply-To: <425151AD.8010401@noos.fr>
References: <425151AD.8010401@noos.fr>
Message-ID: <4251752D.9030207@cox.net>

Daniel Fournier wrote:

>
> There's a third way, my prefered. Just isolate all your testing 
> functions in a specific file and import your "real" functions within 
> it, using the __IMPORT__ function. That way, everything is clean and 
> easy to modify and when your code is ready, you don't have to load the 
> testing file and you avoid a (slight) processing overhead for the JS 
> parsing engine.
>
>
>
Perfect.  That will be a considerable improvement over what I have been 
doing. I am looking forward to writing more Javascript code. I am a 
Python bigot and have really hated dealing with the curly braces and 
semi-colons of Javascript.

Roger Haase

From crosseyedpenguin at cox.net  Sun Apr 10 09:56:21 2005
From: crosseyedpenguin at cox.net (Roger)
Date: Sun Apr 10 12:06:16 2005
Subject: [Jsconsole] Getting Started
In-Reply-To: <42521E11.6060102@noos.fr>
References: <425151AD.8010401@noos.fr> <4251752D.9030207@cox.net>
	<42521E11.6060102@noos.fr>
Message-ID: <42594CA5.1090505@cox.net>

Daniel Fournier wrote:

>
> I understand your point of view. Although I never really wrote any 
> program using Python, I extensively learned it. I like very much 
> Python, which is, IMHO, the best scripting language of our days.
>
> As a matter of fact, I recently tried to apply Python coding style to 
> JavaScript, in a library of functions I developped, aiming to use JS 
> in a functional programming way. Here is an example of this style:
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>
> String.prototype.getLastToFirst = function           
> //<m>String<s>public<d>Reverse string characters
> ()
> {            if (this.isEmpty())
> {                return this.getDefault();                    //trying 
> to set an empty String yields nothing
> }            var string = '';                                        
> /*String*/
>               for (var i=this.length-1, m=0; i>=m; i--)
> {                string += this.charAt(i);
> }            return string;
> };                                                                       
>    //</m>getLastToFirst
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
>
>
> I'd like to know whether this style is "acceptable" by a Python 
> programmer.
>
> This is an extract of a library extending JS built-in types (String, 
> Number, Array...) with useful methods (about 200) with a functional 
> programming horizon. Let me know whether you are interested by such a 
> library: I'll send you a copy of it.
> Of course, it has been developped using extensively JS Console, and 
> each type package (it's a Python vocable, isn't it?) has its own test 
> file.
>
>

Converting from a Python coding style to Javascript is not something 
that comes natural.  I have been influenced by Javascript Lint (the 
add-on to HTML-Kit).  Javascript Lint does not like lines that end with 
")" and demands a ";" at the end of every statement.  Per the Python 
coding style guidlines by Guido van Rossum, Python code is pretty 
dense.  I find the use of the closing curly brace on a line by itself 
very annoying, and I stick them on the end of the preceeding line. 

So taking a random routine from Paul Johnston's SHA-1 as an example, 
here is the before:

------------------------------------
/*
 * Calculate the HMAC-SHA1 of a key and some data
 */
function core_hmac_sha1(key, data)
{
  var bkey = str2binb(key);
  if(bkey.length > 16) bkey = core_sha1(bkey, key.length * chrsz);

  var ipad = Array(16), opad = Array(16);
  for(var i = 0; i < 16; i++)
  {
    ipad[i] = bkey[i] ^ 0x36363636;
    opad[i] = bkey[i] ^ 0x5C5C5C5C;
  }

  var hash = core_sha1(ipad.concat(str2binb(data)), 512 + data.length * 
chrsz);
  return core_sha1(opad.concat(hash), 512 + 160);
}
------------------------------

And my after which passes Javascript Lint.  "i++" replaced with "i+=1" 
and an extra pair of braces in the if statement.

--------------------------------
// Calculate the HMAC-SHA1 of a key and some data
function core_hmac_sha1(key, data) {
    var bkey = str2binb(key);
    if(bkey.length > 16) {
        bkey = core_sha1(bkey, key.length * chrsz); }
    var ipad = Array(16), opad = Array(16);
    for(var i = 0; i < 16; i+=1) {
        ipad[i] = bkey[i] ^ 0x36363636;
        opad[i] = bkey[i] ^ 0x5C5C5C5C; }
    var hash = core_sha1(ipad.concat(str2binb(data)), 512 + data.length 
* chrsz);
    return core_sha1(opad.concat(hash), 512 + 160); }
----------------------------------

Roger Haase