A few months ago I announced Midje-Cascalog, my layer of Midje testing macros over the Cascalog MapReduce DSL. These allow you to write tests for your Cascalog jobs in a style that mimics Cascalog's own query execution syntax. In this post I discuss midje-cascalog's 0.4.0 release, which brings tighter Midje integration and a number of new ways to write tests. I'll start with a refresher on the old syntax before debuting the new. If you're eager, add the following to your project.clj:
[midje-cascalog "0.4.0"]
Midje-Cascalog Refresher
Take the following Cascalog query:
(use 'cascalog.api)
(let [src [["word"]]]
(?<- (stdout)
[?out-word]
(src ?word)
(str ?word " up!" :> ?out-word)))
Executing this code at the repl prints a single tuple with the string word up!
to standard out.
How would you go about testing that this is true? With midje-cascalog, you would swap out the ?<-
form for its testing equivalent: fact?<-
. Here's the same Cascalog test alongside a typical Midje test:
(let [src [["word"]]]
(fact?<- [["word up!"]]
[?out-word]
(src ?word)
(str ?word " up!" :> ?out-word)))
(fact "+ should add two numbers."
(+ 2 2) => 4)
I find that fact?<-
and fact?-
macros can be a bit confusing when you start mixing Cascalog and Midje tests, as they break the Midje pattern of <thing-to-test> => <expected-thing>
. The syntax updates fix all of this with a set of checker functions that mimic Midje's excellent set of collection checkers.
The "produces" checker
Midje-cascalog 0.4.0 introduces the produces
function, mirroring Midje's just
. Let's define a source of tuples and a query to test.
(use 'cascalog.api)
(require '[cascalog.ops :as c])
(def src
[[1 2] [1 3]
[3 4] [3 6]
[5 2] [5 9]])
;; adds the values in each input tuple, sorts the output and returns
;; 2-tuples of the first number and the sum. [1 2] becomes [1 3], for
;; example.
(def query
(<- [?x ?sum]
(src ?x ?y)
(:sort ?x)
(c/sum ?y :> ?sum)))
You can think of a query as a set of tuples waiting to be generated (through query execution). With Midje, you test sets using the just
checker:
(facts
[1 2 3] => (just [1 2 3]) ;; true
[1 2 3] => (just [1 2 3 4])) ;; false
The cascalog analog to just
is the produces
checker. produces
works like just
, but against queries instead of bare collections. Executing the following test shows that the query produces the expected set of pairs, in any order:
(facts
query => (produces [[3 10] [1 5] [5 11]]) ;; true
query => (produces [[1 5] [3 10] [5 11]])) ;; true
You can read this test as saying "query, when executed, produces [3 10], [1 5] and [5 11]. You can also check that a query doesn't produce a set of tuples by swapping out =not=> for =>:
(fact
query =not=> (produces [["string!" 11] [1 5] [5 11]])) ;; true
Using the :in-order
keyword after the expected tuple sequence forces the test to respect ordering:
(facts
query =not=> (produces [[3 10] [5 11] [1 5]] :in-order) ;; true
query => (produces [[1 5] [3 10] [5 11]] :in-order)) ;; true
(:in-order
is really only helpful in cases where output is sorted, like our query above.)
produces-some
The produces-some
checker tests that a query's output contains a subset of tuples:
(fact
query => (produces-some [[5 11] [1 5]])) ;; true
Note that the behaviour of produces-some
is similar to the behavior of Midje's contains
collection checker.
As with produces, you can use the :in-order
keyword to force produces-some
to respect ordering. Gaps between tuples are okay.
(facts
query =not=> (produces-some [[5 11] [1 5]] :in-order) ;; true
query => (produces-some [[1 5] [5 11]] :in-order)) ;; true
Adding the :no-gaps
keyword introduces the constraint that tuples must also be contiguous:
(facts
query =not=> (produces-some [[1 5] [5 11]] :in-order :no-gaps) ;; true
query => (produces-some [[1 5] [3 10]] :in-order :no-gaps)) ;; true
produces-prefix and produces-suffix
produce-prefix
mimics the has-prefix
collection checker by checking that some set of tuples is produced at the beginning of the query's output. produces-prefix
implicitly assumes that tuples will be produced in order with no gaps:
(facts
query => (produces-prefix [[1 5]]) ;; true
query => (produces-prefix [[1 5] [3 10]])) ;; true
Similarly, produce-suffix
mimics the has-suffix
collection checker by checking that the supplied set of tuples is produced at the tail end of a query:
(facts
query => (produces-suffix [[5 11]])) ;; true
log-level keywords
In addition to the keyword options supported above, every one of these checkers supports on optional logging-level keyword. For example, the following two facts are equivalent, but the second one produces :info
level logging when it runs:
(facts
query => (produces-suffix [[5 11]]) ;; true
query => (produces-suffix [[5 11]] :info)) ;; true
Log level keywords can be useful when debugging tests, as errors will often only appear in the logging output. Currently supported keywords are :off
(the default), :fatal
, :warn
, :info
and :debug
. The log level needs to be the first keyword argument if you supply multiple.
wrap-checker
The real power of the 0.4.0
update is the way in which the previous query checkers were defined. Each of the above checkers mimics the behavior of one of Midje's built-in collection checkers with slightly different keyword arguments. This makes sense if you think of a query as a collection of tuples waiting to be produced (by query execution). The above checkers will get you quite a ways, but what if you want to test a query against some other Midje collection checker?
The answer is wrap-checker
. wrap-checker
is a higher-order function that accepts a midje collection checker and wraps it up, turning it into a Cascalog query checker. I'll demonstrate the power of this function by wrapping Midje's has
checker.
has
is a powerful way to run functions across every value in some sequence:
(fact
[1 3 5 7 9] => (has every? odd?) ;; true
[1 3 5 6] => (has some even?)) ;; true
If you try to use has
against a query it will fail, as it expects to be tested against a sequence, not an unexecuted query. Here's how to get around this:
(defn odd-tuple? [tuple]
(odd? (first tuple)))
(defn even-tuple? [tuple]
(even? (first tuple)))
(def has-tuples
(wrap-checker has))
(def new-query
(let [src [[1] [3] [5]]]
(<- [?x] (src ?x))))
(fact
new-query => (has-tuples every? odd-tuple?) ;; true
new-query =not=> (has-tuples some even-tuple?)) ;; true
has-tuples
will support log-level keywords like any of the predefined query collection checkers.
A few more examples:
(defn id-query [src]
(<- [?x] (src ?x)))
(let [one-of-tuples (wrap-checker one-of)
two-of-tuples (wrap-checker two-of)
src [[1] [3] [4]]]
(facts
src => (two-of odd-tuple?) ;; true
src => (one-of even-tuple?) ;; true
(id-query src) => (two-of-tuples odd-tuple?) ;; true
(id-query src) => (one-of-tuples even-tuple?))) ;; true
Backwards Compatibility
All of the collection checkers discussed above can be used with the fact?<-
and fact?-
macros:
(fact?<- (produces-some [[1 5] [5 11]] :in-order)
[?x ?sum]
(src ?x ?y)
(:sort ?x)
(c/sum ?y :> ?sum)) ;; true
fact?<-
and fact?-
are also compatible with all of Midje's unwrapped collection checkers, as discussed here.
Conclusion
Midje is an astonishingly good testing framework; I'm continually surprised by how well its idioms and conventions satisfy Cascalog's needs. In my next post here I'll go over some of the more subtle details of the wrap-checker
function. For the curious, here's the code.
If you'd like more information or additional features, please add your thoughts to the midje-cascalog github issues page, or let me know in the comments below (or on twitter! I'm @sritchie09.)
Comments
comments powered by Disqus