I have a class of methods, if I want to test one method, but the objects created in this method depend on other methods in the class. I don't want to actually call the other methods, I just want to create mock objects to test. How should I do it?
#Test
public void testLoadException(String id) {
WorkflowExecution mockWorkflowExection = getWorkflowExecution(id);
}
I tried to just do so
WorkflowExecution mockExecution = EasyMock.create(WorkflowExecution.class);
Easy.expect(this.test.getWorkflowExecution(EasyMock.anyString())).andReturn(mockExecution);
But this does not work, the test gives me Nullpointer exception.
So can I skip the calling of getWorkflowExecution(id), Thanks!
You need a partial mock. Your example doesn't make much sense. So here is what you seem to want.
public class WorkflowExecution {
public void theRealMethodIWantToCall() {
theMethodIWantToMock();
}
void theMethodIWantToMock() {
}
}
#Test
public void testLoadException() {
WorkflowExecution execution = partialMockBuilder(WorkflowExecution.class)
.addMockedMethod("theMethodIWantToMock")
.mock();
execution.theMethodIWantToMock();
replay(execution);
execution.theRealMethodIWantToCall();
verify(execution);
}
Related
As i posted earlier, we can't put a test code in After method or Before method.
My scenario is like i have 10 test methods after each method i have to run another test method.
Please let me know the answer for this if one knows...
Thanks in Advance.
You can use #Test methods but specify the priority to execute.
#Test( priority = 1 )
public void test1() {
System.out.println("test1");
}
#Test( priority = 2 )
public void test2() {
System.out.println("test2");
}
#Test( priority = 3 )
public void test3() {
System.out.println("test3");
}
in this way you can executed test methods on specified order. I hope it will helps you.
Thank You,
Murali
You need to follow a basic java code, call methods from One class in to Another
Class A
public class A {
static void method1()
{
System.out.println("Selenium_1");
}
static void method2()
{
System.out.println("Selenium_1");
}
}
Class B
public class B extends A {
public static void main(String ar[])
{
method1();
method2();
}
}
Hope this solution may help your problem.
//service to mock
public interface ServiceToMock {
public void operateDouble(Double dbValue);
public void operateCar(Car car);
}
//class under test
public class ClassUnderTest {
ServiceToMock service;
public void operateDouble(Double dbValue){
service.operateDouble(dbValue);
}
public void operateObject(Car car){
service.operateCar(car);
}
}
//unit test class
#RunWith(EasyMockRunner.class)
public class TestEasyMockMatcherUnderTest {
#TestSubject
private final ClassUnderTest easyMockMatcherUnderTest = new ClassUnderTest();
#Mock
private ServiceToMock mock;
#Test
public void testOperateCar() {
//record
mock.operateCar(EasyMock.anyObject(Car.class));
EasyMock.expectLastCall();
// replay
EasyMock.replay(mock);
//matcher here...
easyMockMatcherUnderTest.operateObject(EasyMock.anyObject(Car.class));
//easyMockMatcherUnderTest.operateObject(new Car());
// verify
EasyMock.verify(mock);
}
#Test
public void testOperateDouble() {
// record
mock.operateDouble(EasyMock.anyDouble());
EasyMock.expectLastCall();
// replay
EasyMock.replay(mock);
easyMockMatcherUnderTest.operateDouble(EasyMock.anyDouble());
// verify
EasyMock.verify(mock);
}
}
As the above code has shown, I intent to test two methods(operateDouble, operateObject). But things are kinda weird since everything runs fine in the operateDouble block while the compiler complaints an "Illegal state exception: 1 matchers expected, 2 recored." when runnig operateObject. And if commentting the method operateDouble out, the compaint goes away..So what is the difference between Double and my custom object Car, as the Double can also be considered as an object. And why does codes in operateObject runs well when commenting operateDouble method out?
EasyMock.anyDouble and EasyMock.anyObject are not meant to be used in replay mode. They are used to setup your expectations in record mode.
Use this in your first test (testOperateCar):
easyMockMatcherUnderTest.operateObject(new Car());
and something like this in your second (testOperateDouble):
easyMockMatcherUnderTest.operateDouble(1.0);
By the way, you don't need to call EasyMock.expectLastCall. It is only useful if you expect a void method to be called multiple times, for example:
mock.operateCar(EasyMock.anyObject(Car.class));
EasyMock.expectLastCall().times(3);
Having a test similar to this:
public class myClass
{
public int speed100index = 0;
private List<int> values = new List<int> { 200 };
public int Speed100
{
get
{
return values[speed100index];
}
}
}
[TestClass]
public class UnitTest1
{
[TestMethod]
public void TestMethod1()
{
var fixture = new Fixture();
var sut = fixture.Create<myClass>();
Assert.AreEqual(sut.Speed100, 200);
}
}
Would have expected this to work, but I can see why it's not. But how do I argue, that this is not a problem with AutoFixture, but a problem with the code?
AutoFixture is giving you feedback about the design of your class. The feedback is, you should follow a more object-oriented design for this class.
Protect your private state, to prevent your class from entering an inconsistent state.
You need to make the speed100index field, private, to ensure it remains consistent with the values List.
Here is what I see if I run debugger on your test:
Autofixture assigns a random number to speed100index field because it is public, and in your array there is nothing at point 53 (from my screenshot)
If you set speed100index to be private, Autofixture will not re-assign the number and your test will pass.
I am trying to use AbstractShiroTest abstract class for my unit tests as explained in http://shiro.apache.org/testing.html
I have my test class:
public class BeanTest extends AbstractShiroTest {
...
#Test
public void testShiro() {
Subject subjectUnderTest = createNiceMock(Subject.class);
expect(subjectUnderTest.isAuthenticated()).andReturn(true);
expect(subjectUnderTest.getPrincipal()).andReturn("cenap");
setSubject(subjectUnderTest);
assertTrue("Subject is not authenticated", SecurityUtils.getSubject().isAuthenticated());
assertNotNull("Subject principle null", SecurityUtils.getSubject().getPrincipal());
}
#AfterClass
public static void tearDownClass() {
tearDownShiro();
}
Both assertions fail... SecurityUtils.getSubject() returns some object but isAuthenticated() method of that object returns false and getPrincipal() method returns null. "expect" clauses do not seem to work. What am I missing?
Answering my own question as it might help someone. It was a stupid mistake...
The trick is: Do not forget adding
anyTimes();
after your expect statement and so not forget calling
replay (subjectUnderTest);
after that!
So your BeforeClass method should be like:
#BeforeClass
public static void setUpShiro() {
Subject subjectUnderTest = createNiceMock(Subject.class);
expect(subjectUnderTest.isAuthenticated()).andReturn(true).anyTimes();
expect(subjectUnderTest.getPrincipal()).andReturn(Admin).anyTimes();
setSubject(subjectUnderTest);
replay (subjectUnderTest);
}
first, I was only trying to update a modified model. Lets say, we talk about "Article" as a model.
The following method is implemented in a class called "Articles":
public static void SaveArticle(Article article)
{
if (article.Id == 0)
{
webEntities.Articles.Add(article);
}
else
{
webEntities.Articles.Attach(article);
webEntities.Entry(article).State = EntityState.Modified;
}
webEntities.SaveChanges();
}
So whenever I want to save an modified article in a controller action, I just have to call "Articles.SaveArticle(myArticle);", which works as expected.
So far so good but this means I would need to implement this redundantly for every model/entity.
Then I thought about something like a template-pattern. I.e. a class called "Entity" where "Article" inherits from "Entity".
Furthermore, a class called "Entities" contains a static method like this:
public static void SaveEntity(Entity entity)
{
if (Entity.Id == 0) // <-- Problem 1
{
webEntities.Entities.Add(entity); // <-- Problem 2
}
else
{
webEntities.Entities.Attach(entity); // <-- Problem 3
webEntities.Entry(entity).State = EntityState.Modified; // <-- Problem 4
}
webEntities.SaveChanges();
}
So I would not need to implement it redundantly but I don't know how to solve the problems mentioned in the code above.
Do I think too complicated or what would be a best practice to my problem?
Thanks in advance!
Kind regards
Use generics.
public static void Save<T>(T entity)
where T : class
{
webEntities.Set<T>().AddOrUpdate(entity);
webEntities.SaveChanges();
}
AddOrUpdate is an extension method in System.Data.Entity.Migrations.