For example setting [CoreEx.Json.JsonSerializer.Default] via appsettings.unittest.json would be great.

I have a function that takes an entity from an Azure Storage Queue and places it in an Azure Storage Table. I am using this library's TypeTester to test it. It works great, but I can only assert that the operation was successful.

Because there are fields in my table entity that are generated on-the-fly, I can only call AssertSuccess(). I can't use AssertValue(). My only recourse is to visually examine the log output and say, "Yep, that looks good."

It would be great if I could use a lambda with the ValueAssertor<TValue> and perform my comparisons only on the fields I want to check in my TValue.

Hey @chullybun
I've pushed a branch to show some issues I see with using expressions in UnitTestEx

I have a following tests that passes with "UnitTestEx.Xunit" Version="2.1.1"

		// Arrange
		using var test = CreateApiTester<Startup>();

		// Act
		var result = test
			.Controller<SampleController>()
			.Run(c => c.Get("thisIsATest"))
			.AssertOK()
			.AssertJson("{\"data\": \"this_is_a_test\"}");

but this also passes and shouldn't

		// Act
		var result = test
			.Controller<SampleController>()
			.Run(c => c.Get("thisIsATest"))
			.AssertOK()
			.Assert(new { foo="bar"});

To reproduce add a comment to settings file

{
  "IsEncrypted": false,
  "Values": {
    "AzureWebJobsStorage": "UseDevelopmentStorage=true",
    "FUNCTIONS_WORKER_RUNTIME": "dotnet",
  // test comment
    }
}

and run a test with using var test = FunctionTester.Create<Startup>();

For example, AssertOK asserst status code and value, these should be two asserts. Same for AssertBadRequest.

HttpTriggerTester Expression Tree Limitations

Background

In my tests project, I have created an extension method using reflection to automatically get the route of my HTTP-Triggered-Functions with that method.
The goal here was to eliminate requirements for test code updates after changes to a Function's route in the main code. It almost works.

I've since written my code around this limitation, but it requires me to spin up & run an entire HostTesterBase implementor twice. 😰

Issue

HttpTriggerTester's Run/RunAsync methods, unlike TypeTester's, uses expression trees. SRC

public async Task<ActionResultAssertor> RunAsync(Expression<Func<TFunction, Task<IActionResult>>> expression)

This means that I am unable to write something like this without experiencing compilation errors:

        var sut = await test
            .HttpTrigger<QueueTaskCreateFunction>()
            .RunAsync(f => f.Run(test.CreateHttpRequest(HttpMethod.Post, f.GetFunctionRoute(), contentType: MediaTypeNames.Text.Plain), context.Object));

A statement like this would work with TypeTester, but I can't use TypeTester to test my HTTP-Triggered-Function.

Is there a technical reason for HttpTriggerTester's Run/RunAsync methods not having an overload for Action<T> or Func<T1,T2>??

Workaround

The following boilerplate accomplishes what I intended without any issues:

       var route = test
            .Type<QueueTaskCreateFunction>()
            .Run(f => f.GetFunctionRoute())
            .Result;

        var request = test
            .CreateHttpRequest(HttpMethod.Post, route, contentType: MediaTypeNames.Text.Plain);

        var sut = await test
            .HttpTrigger<QueueTaskCreateFunction>()
            .RunAsync(f => f.Run(request, context.Object));

Flurl can be used with TestServer - see this stack overflow answer - https://stackoverflow.com/questions/50155702/can-i-use-flurlclient-with-asp-net-core-testserver
but UnitTestEx does not expose TestServer via an API, would it be possible to allow it?

I have an HTTP-triggered Azure function with the following signature, using the Microsoft.Azure.Functions.Worker.Http.* classes for the request and response data.

[Function(...)]
public async Task<HttpResponseData> Run([HttpTrigger(...)] HttpRequestData req, FunctionContext context)
{
/*...*/
}

I was unable to get UnitTestEx to work with this setup and had to do my unit testing with Moq and mock classes for those request/response classes.

My functions project uses the isolated worker model, and I followed the example setup the best I could.
In the end, I was unable to use this library because it could not handle HttpRequestData/HttpResponseData.

I am still new to using Azure Functions, so if I can switch these over to what UnitTestEx supports, I'm unaware. 😃

This issue was automatically created by Allstar.

Security Policy Violation
Found 1 outside collaborators with admin access.
This policy requires users with this access to be members of the organisation. That way you can easily audit who has access to your repo, and if an account is compromised it can quickly be denied access to organization resources. To fix this you should either remove the user from repository-based access, or add them to the organization.

• Remove the user from the repository-based access. From the main page of the repository, go to Settings -> Manage Access.
  (For more information, see https://docs.github.com/en/account-and-profile/setting-up-and-managing-your-github-user-account/managing-access-to-your-personal-repositories/removing-a-collaborator-from-a-personal-repository)

OR

• Invite the user to join your organisation. Click your profile photo and choose “Your Organization” → choose the org name → “People” → “Invite Member.” (For more information, see https://docs.github.com/en/organizations/managing-membership-in-your-organization/inviting-users-to-join-your-organization)

If you don't see the Settings tab you probably don't have administrative access. Reach out to the administrators of the organisation to fix this issue.

OR

• Exempt the user by adding an exemption to your organization-level Outside Collaborators configuration file.

This issue will auto resolve when the policy is in compliance.

Issue created by Allstar. See https://github.com/ossf/allstar/ for more information. For questions specific to the repository, please contact the owner or maintainer.

For example, the TypeTester logs the result. As the result maybe IActionResult, this has no inherent properties so when serialized using default serializer an empty object is returned {}. To correctly enable for logging the type should be specified as dynamic:

Implementor.WriteLine(JsonSerializer.Serialize<dynamic>(result, JsonWriteFormat.Indented));

This will simplify access outside of the HTTP and Function test assertors.

Before:

var cr = ObjectComparer.Compare(exp, act);
Assert.IsTrue(cr.AreEqual, cr.DifferencesString);

After:

ObjectComparer.Assert(exp, act);