Objects tests about bacpypes HOT 9 OPEN

All objects covered

from bacpypes.

Tests are done for every objects. Some tests are failing because :

FAIL: test_object (test_ChannelObject.Test_ChannelObject)
This object is not implemented yet

FAIL: test_object (test_LoadControlObject.Test_LoadControlObject)
Need some help to define a shedLevel obejct, DateTime, ArrayOf(CharacterString)

FAIL: test_object (test_NetworkSecurityObject.Test_NetworkSecurityObject)
Need help to define a ArrayOf(NetworkSecurityPolicy), AddressBinding (Sequence)

FAIL: test_object (test_NotificationForwarderObject.Test_NotificationForwarderObject)
Need help to create a SequenceOf(EventNotificationSubscription)

from bacpypes.

I don't have any experience with channel objects. A DateTime object can be created like the other types in basetypes.py like this:

value = DateTime(date=Date(x), time=Time(y))

Where x and y are appropriate initializer values (in this case 4-tuples). A single NetworkSecurityPolicy is an object:

value = NetworkSecurityPolicy(portId=2, securityLevel='plainTrusted')

An Array object can be initialized with a Python array, like this:

value = ArrayOf(Integer)( [1, 2, 3, 4] )

but after that the array is accessed using BACnet array semantics where the first element of the array (index 0) is the length. The SequenceOf can also be initialized with a Python array and doesn't have the funky semantics.

from bacpypes.

I found some doc on the ChannelObject... I'll send it.

from bacpypes.

Thanks Joel for your help on defining ArrayOF, Sequence and others... Now every tests are passing.
I will welcome your comments on the tests I made for objects.

from bacpypes.

...
I think I made bad assumptions on the function object_cannot_write_wrong_property_to_writableProperty

try / except is misplaced

I modified the function and now, I can't get a passing test as for some values, we can write to an object with a "almost the same type" object... actually no means to detect it automatically....

For now, I will pause and wait for comments.

from bacpypes.

The Channel Object is in Clause 12.53, so I'm all set with that. I'll check out the branch let you know what I find.

from bacpypes.

1. For each of the object types there is a list of self.listOfProperties which seems to be a duplicate of the list in in the object class, i.e., AnalogValueObject.properties, with the same information but is a different form. I'm guessing that the intent to to check that the definitions match when they come from two different sources?

self.listOfProperties = [(p.__class__, p.identifier, p.datatype) for p in AnalogValueObject.properties]

2. The places like this:

for each in self.listOfProperties:

would be a little easier to read if the tuple was unpacked:

for prop_class, prop_name, prop_datatype in self.listOfProperties:

3. the object_noWritingToReadableProperty function will pass the first time that obj.WriteProperty raises the ExecutionError, rather than testing all of them.

4. In object_can_write_to_writableProperty the last test self.assertEqual(nmbrOfSuccess,nmbrOfWritableProperties) will always pass because if any of the obj.WriteProperty calls raises an exception, the exception will be passed up to the caller and the function exits. The object_cannot_write_wrong_property_to_writableProperty function traps the exception close to the call.

5. In object_cannot_write_wrong_property_to_writableProperty you could raise an exception for the write succeeding rather than counting them:

try:
    obj.WriteProperty(actualProperty, each)
    raise RuntimeError("writing " + str(each) + " to " + actualProperty + " successful and should have failed")
except (TypeError, ValueError):
    pass

That way you'll get a better diagnostic message when the test fails.

6. The code seems to be missing tests for writable enumerated properties like mode in the Test_LifeSafetyPointObject because none of the values in the writeValues list will match.

7. This is a lot of work!

from bacpypes.

1. The idea behind listOfProperties was to define the list needed inside the test. so if something is modified inside the object, test will notify it. I know it may seem like a repetition, but (maybe due to my lack of experience) I thought that when a new property is needed for an object, we must first define a failing test... then add the feature. This was a way to allow that.

2. Really good point ! Thanks for pointing this out.

3. Yeah I see... :-(

4. I'll work on that

5. Great idea ! I'll try this

6. I guess test pass when using a simple integer. Testing all enumerated value is a big challenge alone. Do you think we should add this there ? Or should we deal with them in their own tests ?

7. Yes. A great way to better understand what's behind the hood too. But I think that the helper make that "not a too hard to follow suite of tests" as everything's in it.

from bacpypes.