View Source ExUnitProperties (StreamData v1.1.1)
Provides macros for property-based testing.
This module provides a few macros that can be used for property-based testing. The core is check/3
,
which allows executing arbitrary tests on many pieces of generated data. Another one is
property/3
, which is meant as a utility to replace the ExUnit.Case.test/3
macro when writing
properties. The last one is gen/3
, which can be used as syntactic sugar to build generators
(see StreamData
for other ways of building generators and for core generators).
Overview of property-based testing
One of the most common ways of writing tests (in Elixir and many other
languages) is to write tests by hand. For example, say that we want to write a
starts_with?/2
function that takes two binaries and returns true
if the
first starts with the second and false
otherwise. We would likely test such
function with something like this:
test "starts_with?/2" do
assert starts_with?("foo", "f")
refute starts_with?("foo", "b")
assert starts_with?("foo", "")
assert starts_with?("", "")
refute starts_with?("", "something")
end
This test highlights the method used to write such kind of tests: they're written by hand. The process usually consists of testing an expected output on a set of expected inputs. This works especially well for edge cases, but the robustness of this test could be improved. This is what property-based testing aims to solve. Property testing is based on two ideas:
- specify a set of properties that a piece of code should satisfy
- test those properties on a very large number of randomly generated data
The point of specifying properties instead of testing manual scenarios is that properties should hold for all the data that the piece of code should be able to deal with, and in turn, this plays well with generating data at random. Writing properties has the added benefit of forcing the programmer to think about their code differently: they have to think about which are invariant properties that their code satisfies.
To go back to the starts_with?/2
example above, let's come up with a
property that this function should hold. Since we know that the Kernel.<>/2
operator concatenates two binaries, we can say that a property of
starts_with?/2
is that the concatenation of binaries a
and b
always
starts with a
. This is easy to model as a property using the check/3
macro
from this module and generators taken from the StreamData
module:
test "starts_with?/2" do
check all a <- StreamData.binary(),
b <- StreamData.binary() do
assert starts_with?(a <> b, a)
end
end
When run, this piece of code will generate a random binary and assign it to
a
, do the same for b
, and then run the assertion. This step will be
repeated for a large number of times (100
by default, but it's
configurable), hence generating many combinations of random a
and b
. If
the body passes for all the generated data, then we consider the property to
hold. If a combination of randomly generated terms fails the body of the
property, then ExUnitProperties
tries to find the smallest set of random
generated terms that still fails the property and reports that; this step is
called shrinking.
Shrinking
Say that our starts_with?/2
function blindly returns false when the second
argument is the empty binary (such as starts_with?("foo", "")
). It's likely
that in 100 runs an empty binary will be generated and bound to b
. When that
happens, the body of the property fails but a
is a randomly generated binary
and this might be inconvenient: for example, a
could be <<0, 74, 192, 99, 24, 26>>
. In this case, the check/3
macro tries to shrink a
to the
smallest term that still fails the property (b
is not shrunk because ""
is
the smallest binary possible). Doing so will lead to a = ""
and b = ""
which is the "minimal" failing case for our function.
The example above is a contrived example but shrinking is a very powerful tool that aims at taking the noise out of the failing data.
For detailed information on shrinking, see also the "Shrinking" section in the
documentation for StreamData
.
Building structs
We can use the built-in generators to generate other kinds of structs. For example, imagine we wanted to test the following function.
def noon?(~T[12:00:00]), do: true
def noon?(_), do: false
We could generate %Time{}
structs as follows:
defp non_noon_generator do
gen all time <- valid_time_generator(), time != ~T[12:00:00] do
time
end
end
defp valid_time_generator do
gen all hour <- StreamData.integer(0..23),
minute <- StreamData.integer(0..59),
second <- StreamData.integer(0..59) do
Time.new!(hour, minute, second)
end
end
and use them in properties:
describe "noon?/1" do
test "returns true for noon" do
assert noon?(~T[12:00:00]) == true
end
property "returns false for other times" do
check all time <- non_noon_generator() do
assert noon?(time) == false
end
end
end
Resources on property-based testing
There are many resources available online on property-based testing. An interesting
read is the original paper that introduced QuickCheck, "QuickCheck: A
Lightweight Tool for Random Testing of Haskell
Programs", a
property-testing tool for the Haskell programming language. Another very
useful resource especially geared towards Erlang and the BEAM is
propertesting.com, a website created by Fred
Hebert: it's a great explanation of property-based testing that includes many
examples. Fred's website uses an Erlang property-based testing tool called
PropEr but many of the things he talks
about apply to ExUnitProperties
as well.
Summary
Functions
Sets up an ExUnit.Case
module for property-based testing.
Runs tests for a property.
Syntactic sugar to create generators.
Picks a random element generated by the StreamData
generator data
.
Defines a not-implemented property test with a string.
Defines a property and imports property-testing facilities in the body.
Functions
Sets up an ExUnit.Case
module for property-based testing.
Runs tests for a property.
This macro provides ad hoc syntax to write properties. Let's see a quick example to get a feel of how it works:
check all int1 <- integer(),
int2 <- integer(),
int1 > 0 and int2 > 0,
sum = int1 + int2 do
assert sum > int1
assert sum > int2
end
Everything between check all
and do
is referred to as clauses. Clauses
are used to specify the values to generate in order to test the properties.
The actual tests that the properties hold live in the do
block.
Clauses work exactly like they work in the gen/1
macro.
The body passed in the do
block is where you test that the property holds
for the generated values. The body is just like the body of a test: use
ExUnit.Assertions.assert/2
(and friends) to assert whatever you want.
Options
:initial_size
- (non-negative integer) the initial generation size used to start generating values. The generation size is then incremented by1
on each iteration. See the "Generation size" section of theStreamData
documentation for more information on generation size. Defaults to1
.:max_runs
- (non-negative integer) the total number of generations to run. Defaults to100
.:max_run_time
- (non-negative integer) the total number of time (in milliseconds) to run a given check for. This is not used by default, so unless a value is given then the length of the test will be determined by:max_runs
. If both:max_runs
and:max_run_time
are given, then the check will finish at whichever comes first,:max_runs
or:max_run_time
.:max_shrinking_steps
- (non-negative integer) the maximum numbers of shrinking steps to perform in case a failing case is found. Defaults to100
.:max_generation_size
- (non-negative integer) the maximum generation size to reach. Note that the size is increased by one on each run. By default, the generation size is unbounded.:initial_seed
- (integer) the initial seed used to drive the random generation. Whencheck all
is run with the same initial seed more than once, then every time the terms generated by the generators will be the same as all other runs. This is useful when you want to deterministically reproduce a result. However, it's usually better to leave:initial_seed
to its default value, which is taken from ExUnit's seed: this way, the random generation will follow options like--seed
used in ExUnit to deterministically reproduce tests.
It is also possible to set the values for :initial_size
, :max_runs
, :max_run_time
, and
:max_shrinking_steps
through your project's config files. This is especially helpful
in combination with :max_runs
when you want to run more iterations on your continuous
integration platform, but keep your local tests fast:
# config/test.exs
import Config
config :stream_data,
max_runs: if System.get_env("CI"), do: 1_000, else: 50
Examples
Check that all values generated by the StreamData.integer/0
generator are
integers:
check all int <- integer() do
assert is_integer(int)
end
Check that String.starts_with?/2
and String.ends_with?/2
always hold for
concatenated strings:
check all start <- binary(),
finish <- binary(),
concat = start <> finish do
assert String.starts_with?(concat, start)
assert String.ends_with?(concat, finish)
end
Check that Kernel.in/2
returns true
when checking if an element taken out
of a list is in that same list (changing the number of runs):
check all list <- list_of(integer()),
member <- member_of(list),
max_runs: 50 do
assert member in list
end
Using check all
in doctests
check all
can be used in doctests. Make sure that the module where you call
doctest(MyModule)
calls use ExUnitProperties
. Then, you can call check all
in your doctests:
@doc """
Tells if a term is an integer.
iex> check all i <- integer() do
...> assert int?(i)
...> end
:ok
"""
def int?(i), do: is_integer(i)
check all
always returns :ok
, so you can use that as the return value of
the whole expression.
Syntactic sugar to create generators.
This macro provides ad-hoc syntax to write complex generators. Let's see a
quick example to get a feel of how it works. Say we have a User
struct:
defmodule User do
defstruct [:name, :email]
end
We can create a generator of users like this:
email_generator = map({binary(), binary()}, fn {left, right} -> left <> "@" <> right end)
user_generator =
gen all name <- binary(),
email <- email_generator do
%User{name: name, email: email}
end
Everything between gen all
and do
is referred to as clauses. You can write
clauses to specify the values to generate. You can then use those values in the do
body.
The newly-created generator will generate values that are the return value of the
do
body using the generated values in the clauses.
Clauses
As seen in the example above, clauses can be of the following types:
value generation - they have the form
pattern <- generator
wheregenerator
must be a generator. These clauses take a value out ofgenerator
on each run and match it againstpattern
. Variables bound inpattern
can be then used throughout subsequent clauses and in thedo
body. Ifpattern
doesn't match a generated value, it's treated like a filter (see the "filtering" clauses described below).filtering and binding - they have the form
expression
. If a filtering clause returns a truthy value, then the set of generated values that appear before the filtering clause is considered valid and generation continues. If the filtering clause returns a falsey value, then the current value is considered invalid and a new value is generated. Note that filtering clauses should not filter out too many times; in case they do, aStreamData.FilterTooNarrowError
error is raised (same asStreamData.filter/3
). Filtering clauses can be used also to assign variables: for example,a = :foo
is a valid clause.
The behaviour of the clauses above is similar to the behaviour of clauses in
Kernel.SpecialForms.for/1
.
Body
The return value of the body passed in the do
block is what is ultimately
generated by the generator return by this macro.
Shrinking
See the module documentation for more information on shrinking. Clauses affect shrinking in the following way:
- filtering clauses affect shrinking like
StreamData.filter/3
- value generation clauses affect shrinking similarly to
StreamData.bind/2
@spec pick(StreamData.t(a)) :: a when a: term()
Picks a random element generated by the StreamData
generator data
.
This function uses the current ExUnit seed to generate a random term from data
. The generation
size (see Generation size) is chosen at random between in 1..100
. If you want finer
control over the generation size, you can use functions like StreamData.resize/2
to resize
data
or StreamData.scale/2
to scale the generation size.
Examples
ExUnitProperties.pick(StreamData.integer())
#=> -21
Defines a not-implemented property test with a string.
Provides a convenient macro that allows a property test to be defined with a
string, but not yet implemented. The resulting property test will always
fail and print a "Not implemented" error message. The resulting test case is
also tagged with :not_implemented
.
This behavior is similar to ExUnit.Case.test/1
.
Examples
property "this will be a property test in the future"
Defines a property and imports property-testing facilities in the body.
This macro is similar to ExUnit.Case.test/3
, except that it denotes a
property. In the given body, all the functions exposed by StreamData
are
imported, as well as check/2
.
When defining a test whose body only consists of one or more check/2
calls,
it's advised to use property/3
so as to clearly denote and scope properties.
Doing so will also improve reporting.
Examples
use ExUnitProperties
property "reversing a list doesn't change its length" do
check all list <- list_of(integer()) do
assert length(list) == length(:lists.reverse(list))
end
end