_Seyed

_Seyed

Hey folks,
I’ve written a regular expression for validating input strings. For testing purposes, I want to setup a scenario where a set of test vectors can be automatically injected as input into a new test and match against the regex. I’m currently testing each vector manually. I’ve written the code below. I was also thinking of using a file as opposed to hard coding the strings. Is there a nice way to this? Any feedback is much appreciated.

 setup_all do
  
     sample_strings = %{
       sample_str1: "test_string",
       sample_str2: "cz-dev",
       sample_str3: "new___cczdj",
       sample_str4: "czar,,,nic",
       }
    end
  
    defp input_length_valid(inp) do
      case String.length(inp) > 100  do
         true -> false
         false -> true
      end
    end
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
    test "Regular expression for string - test #1", sample_strings
    do
      assert sample_strings.sample_str3
         |> String.replace("_", "-")
         |> String.match?( ~r/^(my-regex)*$/)
      assert sample_strings.sample_str3 |> input_length_valid() == true
    end


    test "Regular expression for string - test #2", sample_strings
    do
      assert sample_strings.sample_str2
         |> String.replace("_", "-")
         |> String.match?( ~r/^(my-regex)*$/)
      assert sample_strings.sample_str2 |> input_length_valid() == true
    end

First 6 of 6 Posts Switch mode

al2o3cr

al2o3cr

If your sample strings are constants, you could put them in a module attribute:

@sample_strings %{
  sample_str1: "test_string",
  sample_str2: "cz-dev",
  sample_str3: "new___cczdj",
  sample_str4: "czar,,,nic",
  ...
}

General comment on input_length_valid: there are only four functions that take a single boolean value and return a single boolean value (constant true, constant false, identity, and invert) - whenever you find yourself writing a case with booleans on both sides of the ->s, figure out which one of the four you have and remove the case.

In this case you have “invert” - so input_length_valid simplifies to not(String.length(inp) > 100) or even just String.length(inp) <= 100


As to the test itself, unless there are a LOT of cases in @sample_strings you may find a single test easier to write. For instance, this is a very simple approach:

defp regex_matches?(sample) do
  sample
  |> String.replace("_", "-")
  |> String.match?(~r/^(my-regex)$/)
end

test "sample strings match" do
  Enum.each(@sample_strings, fn {_label, sample} ->
    assert regex_matches?(sample)
    assert input_length_valid(sample)
  end)
end

One downside of this approach is that it will fail the test on the first string that doesn’t match; if you want to see all the failures in a single run you could accumulate them explicitly:

test "sample strings match" do
  failed_matches =
    Enum.reject(@sample_strings, fn {_label, sample} ->
      regex_matches?(sample)
    end)

  assert [] == failed_matches

  # similar for input_length_valid
end

The main thing I like to keep in mind when structuring asserts like these: what do I want to learn when one fails?

_Seyed

_Seyed OP

Hey Matt,
Thanks a lot for the feedback.
My goal is to provide a test bed for trying out regular expressions. I’m currently displaying the strings that fail either test with IO.inspect.

On another note, I was thinking of adding the length_check to the pipe in regex_matches?()/1; since it returns a binary I don’t think it’s a good idea since I have to short circuit the pipeline. Would you recommend a with statement?

 with   true   <- input_length_valid(sample),   
    (the crux) <- String.replace(sample, "_", "-"),  
        true   <- String.match?(~r/^(my-regex)$/)  do

Thank you very much for your guidance.

al2o3cr

al2o3cr

To be frank, I don’t understand the intent of either input_length_valid or the String.replace here since the inputs are literals in the file - so it’s hard to make specific recommendations.

You could use an = clause for the String.replace if you wanted to use with.

_Seyed

_Seyed OP

In my particular use case, the input strings should have less than 100 characters. I think you are correct that the replace statement is a preprocessing step and should not be part of the test. Thank you for putting that into perspective.

dimitarvp

dimitarvp

As an alternative to @al2o3cr’s excellent answer, you can just code-generate test cases for each value so you have one failing test for each value that doesn’t match well:

defmodule YourApp.YourModuleTest do
  use ExUnit.Case

  @values ["test_string", "cz-dev", "new___cczdj", "czar,,,nic"]
  @regex "your_regex_here"

  describe "value" do
    for value <- @values do
      test unquote(value) do
        value = unquote(value)
        value = String.replace(value, "_", "-")
        assert String.match?(value, @regex)
        assert input_length_valid(value)
      end
    end
  end
end

Or you can draw out the heavy guns and use property-based testing (with some limitations of the input values so they are not infinite).

_Seyed

_Seyed OP

Thanks a lot @dimitarvp. :v:

— All posts loaded —

Where Next? Top

Trending in Questions Top

stjefim
Hello! Suppose you are building workflow (order / task / payment) processing system with the following requirements: Each workflow con...
New
jonnycharles
I’m in search of an Elixir library that offers PDF generation capabilities similar to Ruby’s Prawn. While there have been discussions abo...
New
spammy
I’m looking to build a personal workflow to quickly deploy web applications written in elixir/phoenix, for local consumption (ie not on t...
New
dli
Before I dive in myself, did anyone successfully sprinkle Hologram into their existing LiveView app? Looking for hints regarding: Addi...
New
bottlenecked
Hi all, I wanted to ask how the community is dealing with post-release steps. Today we have Ecto migrations, which make sure that the db...
New
roeland
Kia ora, We have been using elixir-google-api to connect to Google Drive. However, with the updates to Tesla due to CVEs this is now bro...
New
rahultumpala
Hello, I have an Elixir backend that implements a custom protocol over TCP. I want to load test the backend and assess the performance o...
New

Other Trending Topics Top

JesseHerrick
Hey, I’m Jesse and I’m the main contributor behind Dexter, a full-featured, lightning-fast Elixir LSP optimized for large codebases. It s...
New
jimsynz
Beam Bots (or just BB for short) is a framework for building fault-tolerant robotics applications in Elixir using familiar OTP patterns. ...
New
Damirados
Hello everyone. After busy few months I am happy to announce v0.1.0 of Emerge &amp; Solve. They are GUI (Emerge) and State management (S...
New
netoum
Corex is an accessible, unstyled UI component library for Phoenix that integrates Zag.js state machines using Vanilla JavaScript and Live...
New
ausimian
Emily is an Elixir library that runs Nx computations on Apple’s MLX. Install it as the default Nx backend and Nx, defn, Axon, Nx.Serving,...
New
juhalehtonen
There has been a thread to discuss the Stack Overflow Developer Survey on this forum every year since 2018, so here’s yet another one for...
New

We're in Beta

About us Mission Statement