Рыбин Леонид

.gitignore

@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
 bin/
 obj/
-.vs/
+.vs/

Testing/Basic/Basic.sln

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+
+Microsoft Visual Studio Solution File, Format Version 12.00
+# Visual Studio Version 17
+VisualStudioVersion = 17.11.35327.3
+MinimumVisualStudioVersion = 10.0.40219.1
+Project("{9A19103F-16F7-4668-BE54-9A1E7A4F7556}") = "Basic", "Basic.csproj", "{3C8EF388-9BF7-47CF-8B51-CA46F08B9253}"
+EndProject
+Global
+	GlobalSection(SolutionConfigurationPlatforms) = preSolution
+		Debug|Any CPU = Debug|Any CPU
+		Release|Any CPU = Release|Any CPU
+	EndGlobalSection
+	GlobalSection(ProjectConfigurationPlatforms) = postSolution
+		{3C8EF388-9BF7-47CF-8B51-CA46F08B9253}.Debug|Any CPU.ActiveCfg = Debug|Any CPU
+		{3C8EF388-9BF7-47CF-8B51-CA46F08B9253}.Debug|Any CPU.Build.0 = Debug|Any CPU
+		{3C8EF388-9BF7-47CF-8B51-CA46F08B9253}.Release|Any CPU.ActiveCfg = Release|Any CPU
+		{3C8EF388-9BF7-47CF-8B51-CA46F08B9253}.Release|Any CPU.Build.0 = Release|Any CPU
+	EndGlobalSection
+	GlobalSection(SolutionProperties) = preSolution
+		HideSolutionNode = FALSE
+	EndGlobalSection
+	GlobalSection(ExtensibilityGlobals) = postSolution
+		SolutionGuid = {54C706B2-21C4-4C49-A162-2E765ACC0F80}
+	EndGlobalSection
+EndGlobal

Testing/Basic/Basic.sln.DotSettings.user

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+<wpf:ResourceDictionary xml:space="preserve" xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml" xmlns:s="clr-namespace:System;assembly=mscorlib" xmlns:ss="urn:shemas-jetbrains-com:settings-storage-xaml" xmlns:wpf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation">
+	<s:String x:Key="/Default/Environment/UnitTesting/UnitTestSessionStore/Sessions/=ac147a29_002D1949_002D44a0_002D9289_002Dab17f1aa8756/@EntryIndexedValue">&lt;SessionState ContinuousTestingMode="0" IsActive="True" Name="All tests in category 'ToRefactor'" xmlns="urn:schemas-jetbrains-com:jetbrains-ut-session"&gt;&#xD;
+  &lt;Or&gt;&#xD;
+    &lt;Category&gt;ToRefactor&lt;/Category&gt;&#xD;
+    &lt;TestAncestor&gt;&#xD;
+      &lt;TestId&gt;NUnit3x::3C8EF388-9BF7-47CF-8B51-CA46F08B9253::net8.0::HomeExercise.Tasks.NumberValidator.NumberValidatorTests&lt;/TestId&gt;&#xD;
+    &lt;/TestAncestor&gt;&#xD;
+  &lt;/Or&gt;&#xD;
+&lt;/SessionState&gt;</s:String></wpf:ResourceDictionary>

Testing/Basic/Homework/1. ObjectComparison/ObjectComparison.cs

@@ -1,4 +1,5 @@
-using NUnit.Framework;
+using FluentAssertions;
+using NUnit.Framework;
 using NUnit.Framework.Legacy;
 
 namespace HomeExercise.Tasks.ObjectComparison;
@@ -14,16 +15,8 @@ public void CheckCurrentTsar()
         var expectedTsar = new Person("Ivan IV The Terrible", 54, 170, 70,
             new Person("Vasili III of Russia", 28, 170, 60, null));
 
-        // Перепишите код на использование Fluent Assertions.
-        ClassicAssert.AreEqual(actualTsar.Name, expectedTsar.Name);
-        ClassicAssert.AreEqual(actualTsar.Age, expectedTsar.Age);
-        ClassicAssert.AreEqual(actualTsar.Height, expectedTsar.Height);
-        ClassicAssert.AreEqual(actualTsar.Weight, expectedTsar.Weight);
-
-        ClassicAssert.AreEqual(expectedTsar.Parent!.Name, actualTsar.Parent!.Name);
-        ClassicAssert.AreEqual(expectedTsar.Parent.Age, actualTsar.Parent.Age);
-        ClassicAssert.AreEqual(expectedTsar.Parent.Height, actualTsar.Parent.Height);
-        ClassicAssert.AreEqual(expectedTsar.Parent.Parent, actualTsar.Parent.Parent);
+        actualTsar.Should().BeEquivalentTo(expectedTsar, options =>
+            options.Excluding(o => o.Name == nameof(Person.Id) && o.DeclaringType == typeof(Person)));
     }
 
     [Test]
@@ -35,6 +28,18 @@ public void CheckCurrentTsar_WithCustomEquality()
             new Person("Vasili III of Russia", 28, 170, 60, null));
 
         // Какие недостатки у такого подхода? 
+        /*
+         1) Метод AreEqual проверяет только фиксированые параметры в Person, поэтому
+            если класс Person будет измненён, то тесты предётся переписывать,
+            добавляя новые или удаляя старые поля.
+         2) Метод AreEqual возвращает True или False, поэтому даже если только одно поле
+            не пройдёт проверку, всё что будет понятно, что проверка не прошла, а
+            что именно было не так, узнать не получится.
+         3) Даже если переписывание тестов не является проблемой (см. 1)), то при добавлении
+            большего количества полей, особенно если типом новых полей будут другие классы
+            со своими полями, метод AreEqual рискует разрастись до монструозных масштабов,
+            из-за чего его станет очень сложно читать.
+        */
         ClassicAssert.True(AreEqual(actualTsar, expectedTsar));
     }
 

Testing/Basic/Homework/2. NumberValidator/NumberValidatorTests.cs

@@ -1,31 +1,70 @@
-
+using System.Collections;
+using FluentAssertions;
 using NUnit.Framework;
-using NUnit.Framework.Legacy;
 
 namespace HomeExercise.Tasks.NumberValidator;
 
 [TestFixture]
 public class NumberValidatorTests
 {
-    [Test]
-    public void Test()
+    [TestCase(-1, 2, true, TestName = "Negative precision throws exception")]
+    [TestCase(0, 2, false, TestName = "Precision equals 0 throws exception")]
+    [TestCase(1, -2, true, TestName = "Negative scale throws exception")]
+    [TestCase(1, 2, false, TestName = "Scale greater than precision throws exception")]
+    [TestCase(1, 1, true, TestName = "Scale equals precision throws exception")]
+    public void NumberValidation_ConstructorThrowsArgumentException(int precision, int scale, bool onlyPositive)
     {
-        Assert.Throws<ArgumentException>(() => new NumberValidator(-1, 2, true));
-        Assert.DoesNotThrow(() => new NumberValidator(1, 0, true));
-        Assert.Throws<ArgumentException>(() => new NumberValidator(-1, 2, false));
-        Assert.DoesNotThrow(() => new NumberValidator(1, 0, true));
-
-        ClassicAssert.IsTrue(new NumberValidator(17, 2, true).IsValidNumber("0.0"));
-        ClassicAssert.IsTrue(new NumberValidator(17, 2, true).IsValidNumber("0"));
-        ClassicAssert.IsTrue(new NumberValidator(17, 2, true).IsValidNumber("0.0"));
-        ClassicAssert.IsFalse(new NumberValidator(3, 2, true).IsValidNumber("00.00"));
-        ClassicAssert.IsFalse(new NumberValidator(3, 2, true).IsValidNumber("-0.00"));
-        ClassicAssert.IsTrue(new NumberValidator(17, 2, true).IsValidNumber("0.0"));
-        ClassicAssert.IsFalse(new NumberValidator(3, 2, true).IsValidNumber("+0.00"));
-        ClassicAssert.IsTrue(new NumberValidator(4, 2, true).IsValidNumber("+1.23"));
-        ClassicAssert.IsFalse(new NumberValidator(3, 2, true).IsValidNumber("+1.23"));
-        ClassicAssert.IsFalse(new NumberValidator(17, 2, true).IsValidNumber("0.000"));
-        ClassicAssert.IsFalse(new NumberValidator(3, 2, true).IsValidNumber("-1.23"));
-        ClassicAssert.IsFalse(new NumberValidator(3, 2, true).IsValidNumber("a.sd"));
+        var action = () => new NumberValidator(precision, scale, onlyPositive);
+
+        action.Should().Throw<ArgumentException>();
+    }
+
+    [Test(Description = "Creating an instance of a class with the correct parameters should not throw an exception")]
+    public void NumberValidation_ConstructorDoesNotHaveArgumentException()
+    {
+        var action = () => new NumberValidator(1, 0, true);
+
+        action.Should().NotThrow();
+    }
+
+    [TestCaseSource(nameof(TestCase1))]
+    [TestCaseSource(nameof(TestCase2))]
+    public bool IsValidNumber_WorksCorrectly(int precision, int scale, bool onlyPositive, string value)
+    {
+        return new NumberValidator(precision, scale, onlyPositive).IsValidNumber(value);
+    }
+
+    public static IEnumerable TestCase1
+    {
+        get
+        {
+            yield return new TestCaseData(1, 0, true, "0").SetName("Validation of zero with the correct parameters should be completed successfully").Returns(true);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(2, 1, true, "0.0").SetName("Validation of zero with a zero fractional part separated by a dot with the correct parameters should be completed successfully").Returns(true);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(2, 1, true, "0.1").SetName("Validation of zero with a non-zero fractional part separated by a dot with correct parameters should be completed successfully").Returns(true);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(2, 1, true, "0,1").SetName("Validation of zero with a non-zero decimal part separated by a comma with correct parameters should be completed successfully").Returns(true);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(2, 0, true, "+1").SetName("Validation of a positive integer with an explicit plus sign with correct parameters should be completed successfully").Returns(true);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(3, 1, true, "+1.1").SetName("Validation of a positive number with a non-zero fractional part separated by a dot and an explicit plus sign with the correct parameters must be completed successfully").Returns(true);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(3, 1, true, "+1,1").SetName("Validation of a positive number with a non-zero fractional part separated by a comma and an explicit plus sign with the correct parameters must be completed successfully").Returns(true);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(2, 0, false, "-1").SetName("Validation of a negative integer with an explicit minus sign with correct parameters should be completed successfully").Returns(true);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(3, 1, false, "-1.1").SetName("Validation of a negative number with a non-zero fractional part separated by a dot and an explicit minus sign with the correct parameters must be completed successfully").Returns(true);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(3, 1, false, "-1,1").SetName("Validation of a negative number with a non-zero fractional part separated by a comma and an explicit minus sign with the correct parameters must be completed successfully").Returns(true);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(7, 2, true, "671,23").SetName("Validation a real number with a non-zero fractional part separated by a comma with the correct parameters must be completed successfully").Returns(true);
+        }
+    }
+
+    public static IEnumerable TestCase2
+    {
+        get
+        {
+            yield return new TestCaseData(2, 0, true, "").SetName("Empty string is not allowed").Returns(false);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(2, 1, true, ".0").SetName("Integer part of a real number must be").Returns(false);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(2, 0, true, "0.").SetName("Fractional part of a real number must be if a separator character is used").Returns(false);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(2, 0, true, "-1").SetName("If a minus is explicitly specified, onlyPositive must be false").Returns(false);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(10, 2, true, "abcde.f").SetName("Use only digits").Returns(false);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(10, 9, true, "127.0.0.1").SetName("Only real numbers format").Returns(false);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(3, 2, true, "4321.5").SetName("If precision is less than number of digits in the number, return false").Returns(false);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(3, 0, true, "+145").SetName("If a plus is explicitly specified, it must be taken into account when calculating precision").Returns(false);
+            yield return new TestCaseData(3, 0, false, "-124").SetName("If a minus is explicitly specified, it must be taken into account when calculating precision").Returns(false);
+        }
     }
 }