I am trying to run just a simple test using easyMock:
public class Class1 implements Interface1{
public void method1(Object obj){
if(isEnable()){
doSmth();
}
}
public boolean isEnable(){
return isEnable;
}
}
My test:
Interface1 test1= Interface1(Class1.class);
test1.method1(anyObject);
expectLastCall();
expect(test1.isEnable).andReturn(true);
replay(test1);
test1.method1(new Object());
verify(test1);
Error:
Expectation failure on verify:
isEnable(): expected: 1, actual: 0
Where is the problem? I have read tons of examples where there are similar problems with the parameters sent, but not a method without params example1 or this tutorial, that I found interesting
Thanks in advance
Change the mocking code little bit. You are wanting to call a method isEnable and return true.
Interface1 test1= Interface1(Class1.class);
test1.method1(anyObject);
expectLastCall();
expect(test1.isEnable()).andReturn(true);
replay(test1);
Change you actual test to
test1.method1(new Object());
test1.isEnable();
verify(test1);
Related
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);
}
I am currently using selenium with Java,And want to implement cucumber to make test script more readable.
Currently facing issue while passing argument to java method where Enum is expected as parameter.
I would also like to know if there are any other known limitations of cucumber-java before migrating current framework.
The answer is: Yes
You can use all kind of different types in your scenario: primitive types, own classes (POJOs), enums, ...
Scenario :
Feature: Setup Enum and Print value
In order to manage my Enum
As a System Admin
I want to get the Enum
Scenario: Verify Enum Print
When I supply enum value "GET"
Step definition code :
import cucumber.api.java.en.When;
public class EnumTest {
#When("^I supply enum value \"([^\"]*)\"$")
public void i_supply_enum_value(TestEnum arg1) throws Throwable {
testMyEnum(arg1);
}
public enum TestEnum {
GET,
POST,
PATCH
}
protected void testMyEnum(TestEnum testEnumValue) {
switch (testEnumValue) {
case GET:
System.out.println("Enum Value GET");
break;
case POST:
System.out.println("Enum Value POST");
break;
default:
System.out.println("Enum Value PATCH");
break;
}
}
}
Let me know how you are doing. I could try to help you.
This youtube lecture of about 11 minutes gives a good way of doing it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_N_ca6lStrU
For example,
// enum, obviously in a separate file,
public enum MessageBarButtonType {
Speak, Clear, Delete, Share
}
// method for parameter type. if you want to use a different method name, you could do #ParameterType(name="newMethodName", value="Speak|Clear|Delete|Share") according to the video.
#ParameterType("Speak|Clear|Delete|Share")
public MessageBarButtonType MessageBarButtonType(String buttonType) {
return MessageBarButtonType.valueOf(buttonType);
}
// use like this. the name inside {} should match the name of method, though I just used the type name.
#Then("Select message bar {MessageBarButtonType} button")
public void select_message_bar_button(MessageBarButtonType buttonType) {
...
}
First register a transformer based on an ObjectMapper, then you can just use enums as would be expected.
private final ObjectMapper objectMapper = new ObjectMapper().registerModule(new JavaTimeModule());
#DefaultParameterTransformer
#DefaultDataTableEntryTransformer
#DefaultDataTableCellTransformer
public Object defaultTransformer(Object fromValue, Type toValueType) {
JavaType javaType = objectMapper.constructType(toValueType);
return objectMapper.convertValue(fromValue, javaType);
}
Scenario: No.6 Parameter scenario enum
Given the professor level is ASSOCIATE
#Given("the professor level is {}")
public void theProfessorLevelIs(ProfLevels level) {
System.out.println(level);
System.out.println("");
}
public enum ProfLevels {
ASSISTANT, ASSOCIATE, PROFESSOR
}
Source
This is no more supported in latest io.cucumber maven group
https://github.com/cucumber/cucumber-jvm/issues/1393
//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);
I have a util function as below:
public static boolean isWebElementEnabled(WebElement element) {
try {
return element.isEnabled();
} catch (Exception exx) {
return false;
}
}
public static boolean chkForThisElement(WebElement myElement) {
try {
return myElement.isDisplayed();
} catch (Exception e) {
// TODO Auto-generated catch block
return false;
}
}
I call it like this in the base class:
public static boolean isusernameBoxEnabled = isWebElementEnabled(unameBox);
public static boolean ispWordBoxEnabled = isWebElementEnabled(pwordBox);
public static boolean issubmitBtnEnabled = isWebElementEnabled(submitBtn);
public static boolean isctrsDrpdwnEnabled = isWebElementEnabled(multyCts);
When I test it in the Test class, it always returns false. I tried diff ways of testing for existence, but it only returns false.
#Test(priority=1)
public void verifyLoginpagecontrols() {
Assert.assertTrue(isusernameBoxEnabled);
Assert.assertTrue(ispWordBoxEnabled);
Assert.assertTrue(issubmitBtnEnabled);
Assert.assertTrue(isctrsDrpdwnEnabled);
}
i found a solution that works cool with Ff and Chromre driver nevertheless fails in Htmlunit driver.
Solution for the above problem -
// Initialize the home page elements and then check for assertions;
homePagePO searchPage = PageFactory.initElements(driver,
homePagePO.class);
Assert.assertTrue(chkForThisElement(searchPage.AccManagerHref));
Assert.assertTrue(chkForThisElement(searchPage.disHref));
Sorry to say but I find several things wrong with your code :-
You have not initialized the page factory. That is the reason why you are getting the null error.
In your comment, you have said that you are finding elements by using #findBy. But why have you decalared the WebElement as static?.
Why have you declared isusernameBoxEnabled and related boolean variables as global variables. You could use the isWebElementEnabled() function in your assert directly.
Basically your isWebElementEnabled() is not useful at all if you are using page factory.
Because the moment you use unameBox, selenium looks for the element in the webpage and if not found returns a noSuchElement Exception. So unameBox wont reach isWebElementEnabled() if it is not found in the webpage.
You said there is a base class and Test class. But I don't understand how your code works if there are different classes because you have not made a reference to static variable as Assert.assertTrue(baseClass.isusernameBoxEnabled). So I am assuming that you have only one class and different methods.
Try the following code :-
public class Base {
#FindBy()
WebElement unameBox;
#FindBy()
WebElement pwordBox;
#FindBy()
WebElement submitBtn;
#FindBy()
WebElement multyCts;
}
public class Test {
#Test(priority=1)
public void verifyLoginpagecontrols() {
//initialize page factory
Base base = PageFactory.initElements(driver, Base.class);
Assert.assertTrue(base.unameBox.isEnabled());
Assert.assertTrue(base.pwordBox.isEnabled());
Assert.assertTrue(base.submitBtn.isEnabled());
Assert.assertTrue(base.multyCts.isEnabled());
}
}
Hope this helps you.
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);
}