Related
public class A {
public void method(boolean b){
if (b == true)
method1();
else
method2();
}
private void method1() {}
private void method2() {}
}
public class TestA {
#Test
public void testMethod() {
A a = mock(A.class);
a.method(true);
//how to test like verify(a).method1();
}
}
How to test private method is called or not, and how to test private method using mockito?
Not possible through mockito. From their wiki
Why Mockito doesn't mock private methods?
Firstly, we are not dogmatic about mocking private methods. We just
don't care about private methods because from the standpoint of
testing private methods don't exist. Here are a couple of reasons
Mockito doesn't mock private methods:
It requires hacking of classloaders that is never bullet proof and it
changes the api (you must use custom test runner, annotate the class,
etc.).
It is very easy to work around - just change the visibility of method
from private to package-protected (or protected).
It requires me to spend time implementing & maintaining it. And it
does not make sense given point #2 and a fact that it is already
implemented in different tool (powermock).
Finally... Mocking private methods is a hint that there is something
wrong with OO understanding. In OO you want objects (or roles) to
collaborate, not methods. Forget about pascal & procedural code. Think
in objects.
You can't do that with Mockito but you can use Powermock to extend Mockito and mock private methods. Powermock supports Mockito. Here's an example.
Here is a small example how to do it with powermock
public class Hello {
private Hello obj;
private Integer method1(Long id) {
return id + 10;
}
}
To test method1 use code:
Hello testObj = new Hello();
Integer result = Whitebox.invokeMethod(testObj, "method1", new Long(10L));
To set private object obj use this:
Hello testObj = new Hello();
Hello newObject = new Hello();
Whitebox.setInternalState(testObj, "obj", newObject);
While Mockito doesn't provide that capability, you can achieve the same result using Mockito + the JUnit ReflectionUtils class or the Spring ReflectionTestUtils class. Please see an example below taken from here explaining how to invoke a private method:
ReflectionTestUtils.invokeMethod(student, "saveOrUpdate", "From Unit test");
Complete examples with ReflectionTestUtils and Mockito can be found in the book Mockito for Spring.
Official documentation Spring Testing
By using reflection, private methods can be called from test classes.
In this case,
//test method will be like this ...
public class TestA {
#Test
public void testMethod() {
A a= new A();
Method privateMethod = A.class.getDeclaredMethod("method1", null);
privateMethod.setAccessible(true);
// invoke the private method for test
privateMethod.invoke(A, null);
}
}
If the private method calls any other private method, then we need to spy the object and stub the another method.The test class will be like ...
//test method will be like this ...
public class TestA {
#Test
public void testMethod() {
A a= new A();
A spyA = spy(a);
Method privateMethod = A.class.getDeclaredMethod("method1", null);
privateMethod.setAccessible(true);
doReturn("Test").when(spyA, "method2"); // if private method2 is returning string data
// invoke the private method for test
privateMethod.invoke(spyA , null);
}
}
**The approach is to combine reflection and spying the object.
**method1 and **method2 are private methods and method1 calls method2.
Think about this in terms of behaviour, not in terms of what methods there are. The method called method has a particular behaviour if b is true. It has different behaviour if b is false. This means you should write two different tests for method; one for each case. So instead of having three method-oriented tests (one for method, one for method1, one for method2, you have two behaviour-oriented tests.
Related to this (I suggested this in another SO thread recently, and got called a four-letter word as a result, so feel free to take this with a grain of salt); I find it helpful to choose test names that reflect the behaviour that I'm testing, rather than the name of the method. So don't call your tests testMethod(), testMethod1(), testMethod2() and so forth. I like names like calculatedPriceIsBasePricePlusTax() or taxIsExcludedWhenExcludeIsTrue() that indicate what behaviour I'm testing; then within each test method, test only the indicated behaviour. Most such behaviours will involve just one call to a public method, but may involve many calls to private methods.
Hope this helps.
I was able to test a private method inside using mockito using reflection.
Here is the example, tried to name it such that it makes sense
//Service containing the mock method is injected with mockObjects
#InjectMocks
private ServiceContainingPrivateMethod serviceContainingPrivateMethod;
//Using reflection to change accessibility of the private method
Class<?>[] params = new Class<?>[]{PrivateMethodParameterOne.class, PrivateMethodParameterTwo.class};
Method m = serviceContainingPrivateMethod .getClass().getDeclaredMethod("privateMethod", params);
//making private method accessible
m.setAccessible(true);
assertNotNull(m.invoke(serviceContainingPrivateMethod, privateMethodParameterOne, privateMethodParameterTwo).equals(null));
You're not suppose to test private methods. Only non-private methods needs to be tested as these should call the private methods anyway. If you "want" to test private methods, it may indicate that you need to rethink your design:
Am I using proper dependency injection?
Do I possibly needs to move the private methods into a separate class and rather test that?
Must these methods be private? ...can't they be default or protected rather?
In the above instance, the two methods that are called "randomly" may actually need to be placed in a class of their own, tested and then injected into the class above.
There is actually a way to test methods from a private member with Mockito. Let's say you have a class like this:
public class A {
private SomeOtherClass someOtherClass;
A() {
someOtherClass = new SomeOtherClass();
}
public void method(boolean b){
if (b == true)
someOtherClass.method1();
else
someOtherClass.method2();
}
}
public class SomeOtherClass {
public void method1() {}
public void method2() {}
}
If you want to test a.method will invoke a method from SomeOtherClass, you can write something like below.
#Test
public void testPrivateMemberMethodCalled() {
A a = new A();
SomeOtherClass someOtherClass = Mockito.spy(new SomeOtherClass());
ReflectionTestUtils.setField( a, "someOtherClass", someOtherClass);
a.method( true );
Mockito.verify( someOtherClass, Mockito.times( 1 ) ).method1();
}
ReflectionTestUtils.setField(); will stub the private member with something you can spy on.
I don't really understand your need to test the private method. The root problem is that your public method has void as return type, and hence you are not able to test your public method. Hence you are forced to test your private method. Is my guess correct??
A few possible solutions (AFAIK):
Mocking your private methods, but still you won't be "actually" testing your methods.
Verify the state of object used in the method. MOSTLY methods either do some processing of the input values and return an output, or change the state of the objects. Testing the objects for the desired state can also be employed.
public class A{
SomeClass classObj = null;
public void publicMethod(){
privateMethod();
}
private void privateMethod(){
classObj = new SomeClass();
}
}
[Here you can test for the private method, by checking the state change of the classObj from null to not null.]
Refactor your code a little (Hope this is not a legacy code). My funda of writing a method is that, one should always return something (a int/ a boolean). The returned value MAY or MAY NOT be used by the implementation, but it will SURELY BE used by the test
code.
public class A
{
public int method(boolean b)
{
int nReturn = 0;
if (b == true)
nReturn = method1();
else
nReturn = method2();
}
private int method1() {}
private int method2() {}
}
Put your test in the same package, but a different source folder (src/main/java vs. src/test/java) and make those methods package-private. Imo testability is more important than privacy.
In cases where the private method is not void and the return value is used as a parameter to an external dependency's method, you can mock the dependency and use an ArgumentCaptor to capture the return value.
For example:
ArgumentCaptor<ByteArrayOutputStream> csvOutputCaptor = ArgumentCaptor.forClass(ByteArrayOutputStream.class);
//Do your thing..
verify(this.awsService).uploadFile(csvOutputCaptor.capture());
....
assertEquals(csvOutputCaptor.getValue().toString(), "blabla");
Building on #aravind-yarram's answer: Not possible through mockito. From their wiki
So what's the OO way of testing private methods? Private methods with complex logic might be a sign that your class is violating the principle of single responsibility and that some of the logic should be moved to a new class.
Indeed, by extracting those private methods to public methods of more granular classes, you can unit test them without breaking the encapsulation of your original class.
I've written a factory to produce java.sql.Connection objects:
public class MySQLDatabaseConnectionFactory implements DatabaseConnectionFactory {
#Override public Connection getConnection() {
try {
return DriverManager.getConnection(...);
} catch (SQLException e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
}
}
I'd like to validate the parameters passed to DriverManager.getConnection, but I don't know how to mock a static method. I'm using JUnit 4 and Mockito for my test cases. Is there a good way to mock/verify this specific use-case?
Use PowerMockito on top of Mockito.
Example code:
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest(DriverManager.class)
public class Mocker {
#Test
public void shouldVerifyParameters() throws Exception {
//given
PowerMockito.mockStatic(DriverManager.class);
BDDMockito.given(DriverManager.getConnection(...)).willReturn(...);
//when
sut.execute(); // System Under Test (sut)
//then
PowerMockito.verifyStatic();
DriverManager.getConnection(...);
}
More information:
Why doesn't Mockito mock static methods?
Mocking of static methods in Mockito is possible since Mockito 3.4.0.
For more details see:
https://github.com/mockito/mockito/releases/tag/v3.4.0
https://github.com/mockito/mockito/issues/1013
https://javadoc.io/doc/org.mockito/mockito-core/latest/org/mockito/Mockito.html#static_mocks
assertEquals("foo", Foo.method());
try (MockedStatic mocked = mockStatic(Foo.class)) {
mocked.when(Foo::method).thenReturn("bar");
assertEquals("bar", Foo.method());
mocked.verify(Foo::method);
}
assertEquals("foo", Foo.method());
In your case, something like this:
#Test
public void testStaticMockWithVerification() throws SQLException {
try (MockedStatic<DriverManager> dummy = Mockito.mockStatic(DriverManager.class)) {
DatabaseConnectionFactory factory = new MySQLDatabaseConnectionFactory();
dummy.when(() -> DriverManager.getConnection("arg1", "arg2", "arg3"))
.thenReturn(new Connection() {/*...*/});
factory.getConnection();
dummy.verify(() -> DriverManager.getConnection(eq("arg1"), eq("arg2"), eq("arg3")));
}
}
NOTE: mocking STATIC METHODS requires mockito-inline dependency instead of mockito-core.
For JUnit5 also add this:
<dependency>
<groupId>org.mockito</groupId>
<artifactId>mockito-junit-jupiter</artifactId>
<version>${mockito.version}</version>
<scope>test</scope>
</dependency>
The typical strategy for dodging static methods that you have no way of avoiding using, is by creating wrapped objects and using the wrapper objects instead.
The wrapper objects become facades to the real static classes, and you do not test those.
A wrapper object could be something like
public class Slf4jMdcWrapper {
public static final Slf4jMdcWrapper SINGLETON = new Slf4jMdcWrapper();
public String myApisToTheSaticMethodsInSlf4jMdcStaticUtilityClass() {
return MDC.getWhateverIWant();
}
}
Finally, your class under test can use this singleton object by, for example,
having a default constructor for real life use:
public class SomeClassUnderTest {
final Slf4jMdcWrapper myMockableObject;
/** constructor used by CDI or whatever real life use case */
public myClassUnderTestContructor() {
this.myMockableObject = Slf4jMdcWrapper.SINGLETON;
}
/** constructor used in tests*/
myClassUnderTestContructor(Slf4jMdcWrapper myMock) {
this.myMockableObject = myMock;
}
}
And here you have a class that can easily be tested, because you do not directly use a class with static methods.
If you are using CDI and can make use of the #Inject annotation then it is even easier.
Just make your Wrapper bean #ApplicationScoped, get that thing injected as a collaborator (you do not even need messy constructors for testing), and go on with the mocking.
I had a similar issue. The accepted answer did not work for me, until I made the change: #PrepareForTest(TheClassThatContainsStaticMethod.class), according to PowerMock's documentation for mockStatic.
And I don't have to use BDDMockito.
My class:
public class SmokeRouteBuilder {
public static String smokeMessageId() {
try {
return InetAddress.getLocalHost().getHostAddress();
} catch (UnknownHostException e) {
log.error("Exception occurred while fetching localhost address", e);
return UUID.randomUUID().toString();
}
}
}
My test class:
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest(SmokeRouteBuilder.class)
public class SmokeRouteBuilderTest {
#Test
public void testSmokeMessageId_exception() throws UnknownHostException {
UUID id = UUID.randomUUID();
mockStatic(InetAddress.class);
mockStatic(UUID.class);
when(InetAddress.getLocalHost()).thenThrow(UnknownHostException.class);
when(UUID.randomUUID()).thenReturn(id);
assertEquals(id.toString(), SmokeRouteBuilder.smokeMessageId());
}
}
As mentioned before you can not mock static methods with mockito.
If changing your testing framework is not an option you can do the following:
Create an interface for DriverManager, mock this interface, inject it via some kind of dependency injection and verify on that mock.
For those who use JUnit 5, Powermock is not an option. You'll require the following dependencies to successfully mock a static method with just Mockito.
testCompile group: 'org.mockito', name: 'mockito-core', version: '3.6.0'
testCompile group: 'org.mockito', name: 'mockito-junit-jupiter', version: '3.6.0'
testCompile group: 'org.mockito', name: 'mockito-inline', version: '3.6.0'
mockito-junit-jupiter add supports for JUnit 5.
And support for mocking static methods is provided by mockito-inline dependency.
Example:
#Test
void returnUtilTest() {
assertEquals("foo", UtilClass.staticMethod("foo"));
try (MockedStatic<UtilClass> classMock = mockStatic(UtilClass.class)) {
classMock.when(() -> UtilClass.staticMethod("foo")).thenReturn("bar");
assertEquals("bar", UtilClass.staticMethod("foo"));
}
assertEquals("foo", UtilClass.staticMethod("foo"));
}
The try-with-resource block is used to make the static mock remains temporary, so it's mocked only within that scope.
When not using a try block, make sure to close the mock, once you are done with the assertions.
MockedStatic<UtilClass> classMock = mockStatic(UtilClass.class)
classMock.when(() -> UtilClass.staticMethod("foo")).thenReturn("bar");
assertEquals("bar", UtilClass.staticMethod("foo"));
classMock.close();
Mocking void methods:
When mockStatic is called on a class, all the static void methods in that class automatically get mocked to doNothing().
Observation : When you call static method within a static entity, you need to change the class in #PrepareForTest.
For e.g. :
securityAlgo = MessageDigest.getInstance(SECURITY_ALGORITHM);
For the above code if you need to mock MessageDigest class, use
#PrepareForTest(MessageDigest.class)
While if you have something like below :
public class CustomObjectRule {
object = DatatypeConverter.printHexBinary(MessageDigest.getInstance(SECURITY_ALGORITHM)
.digest(message.getBytes(ENCODING)));
}
then, you'd need to prepare the class this code resides in.
#PrepareForTest(CustomObjectRule.class)
And then mock the method :
PowerMockito.mockStatic(MessageDigest.class);
PowerMockito.when(MessageDigest.getInstance(Mockito.anyString()))
.thenThrow(new RuntimeException());
You can do it with a little bit of refactoring:
public class MySQLDatabaseConnectionFactory implements DatabaseConnectionFactory {
#Override public Connection getConnection() {
try {
return _getConnection(...some params...);
} catch (SQLException e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
}
//method to forward parameters, enabling mocking, extension, etc
Connection _getConnection(...some params...) throws SQLException {
return DriverManager.getConnection(...some params...);
}
}
Then you can extend your class MySQLDatabaseConnectionFactory to return a mocked connection, do assertions on the parameters, etc.
The extended class can reside within the test case, if it's located in the same package (which I encourage you to do)
public class MockedConnectionFactory extends MySQLDatabaseConnectionFactory {
Connection _getConnection(...some params...) throws SQLException {
if (some param != something) throw new InvalidParameterException();
//consider mocking some methods with when(yourMock.something()).thenReturn(value)
return Mockito.mock(Connection.class);
}
}
I also wrote a combination of Mockito and AspectJ: https://github.com/iirekm/varia/tree/develop/ajmock
Your example becomes:
when(() -> DriverManager.getConnection(...)).thenReturn(...);
Mockito cannot capture static methods, but since Mockito 2.14.0 you can simulate it by creating invocation instances of static methods.
Example (extracted from their tests):
public class StaticMockingExperimentTest extends TestBase {
Foo mock = Mockito.mock(Foo.class);
MockHandler handler = Mockito.mockingDetails(mock).getMockHandler();
Method staticMethod;
InvocationFactory.RealMethodBehavior realMethod = new InvocationFactory.RealMethodBehavior() {
#Override
public Object call() throws Throwable {
return null;
}
};
#Before
public void before() throws Throwable {
staticMethod = Foo.class.getDeclaredMethod("staticMethod", String.class);
}
#Test
public void verify_static_method() throws Throwable {
//register staticMethod call on mock
Invocation invocation = Mockito.framework().getInvocationFactory().createInvocation(mock, withSettings().build(Foo.class), staticMethod, realMethod,
"some arg");
handler.handle(invocation);
//verify staticMethod on mock
//Mockito cannot capture static methods so we will simulate this scenario in 3 steps:
//1. Call standard 'verify' method. Internally, it will add verificationMode to the thread local state.
// Effectively, we indicate to Mockito that right now we are about to verify a method call on this mock.
verify(mock);
//2. Create the invocation instance using the new public API
// Mockito cannot capture static methods but we can create an invocation instance of that static invocation
Invocation verification = Mockito.framework().getInvocationFactory().createInvocation(mock, withSettings().build(Foo.class), staticMethod, realMethod,
"some arg");
//3. Make Mockito handle the static method invocation
// Mockito will find verification mode in thread local state and will try verify the invocation
handler.handle(verification);
//verify zero times, method with different argument
verify(mock, times(0));
Invocation differentArg = Mockito.framework().getInvocationFactory().createInvocation(mock, withSettings().build(Foo.class), staticMethod, realMethod,
"different arg");
handler.handle(differentArg);
}
#Test
public void stubbing_static_method() throws Throwable {
//register staticMethod call on mock
Invocation invocation = Mockito.framework().getInvocationFactory().createInvocation(mock, withSettings().build(Foo.class), staticMethod, realMethod,
"foo");
handler.handle(invocation);
//register stubbing
when(null).thenReturn("hey");
//validate stubbed return value
assertEquals("hey", handler.handle(invocation));
assertEquals("hey", handler.handle(invocation));
//default null value is returned if invoked with different argument
Invocation differentArg = Mockito.framework().getInvocationFactory().createInvocation(mock, withSettings().build(Foo.class), staticMethod, realMethod,
"different arg");
assertEquals(null, handler.handle(differentArg));
}
static class Foo {
private final String arg;
public Foo(String arg) {
this.arg = arg;
}
public static String staticMethod(String arg) {
return "";
}
#Override
public String toString() {
return "foo:" + arg;
}
}
}
Their goal is not to directly support static mocking, but to improve its public APIs so that other libraries, like Powermockito, don't have to rely on internal APIs or directly have to duplicate some Mockito code. (source)
Disclaimer: Mockito team thinks that the road to hell is paved with static methods. However, Mockito's job is not to protect your code from static methods. If you don’t like your team doing static mocking, stop using Powermockito in your organization. Mockito needs to evolve as a toolkit with an opinionated vision on how Java tests should be written (e.g. don't mock statics!!!). However, Mockito is not dogmatic. We don't want to block unrecommended use cases like static mocking. It's just not our job.
To mock static method you should use a Powermock look at:
https://github.com/powermock/powermock/wiki/MockStatic.
Mockito doesn't provide this functionality.
You can read nice a article about mockito:
http://refcardz.dzone.com/refcardz/mockito
I found one solution in Mockito. This feature comes with a version only from 3.4.0
https://asolntsev.github.io/en/2020/07/11/mockito-static-methods/
dependency
In your build.gradle replace mockito-core:3.3.3 by mockito-inline:3.4.0:
testImplementation('org.mockito:mockito-inline:3.4.0')
what are we going to mock
class Buddy
{
static String name()
{
return "John";
}
}
Mock the static method
#Test
void lookMomICanMockStaticMethods()
{
assertThat(Buddy.name()).isEqualTo("John");
try (MockedStatic<Buddy> theMock = Mockito.mockStatic(Buddy.class))
{
theMock.when(Buddy::name).thenReturn("Rafael");
assertThat(Buddy.name()).isEqualTo("Rafael");
}
assertThat(Buddy.name()).isEqualTo("John");
}
I think this could help us.
Since that method is static, it already has everything you need to use it, so it defeats the purpose of mocking.
Mocking the static methods is considered to be a bad practice.
If you try to do that, it means there is something wrong with the way you want to perform testing.
Of course you can use PowerMockito or any other framework capable of doing that, but try to rethink your approach.
For example: try to mock/provide the objects, which that static method consumes instead.
When you try to mock the static method, you have to write the test inside the try block. because It's important to note that scoped mocks must be closed by the entity that activates the mock.
try (MockedStatic<Tester> tester = Mockito.mockStatic(Tester.class)) {
tester.when(() -> Tester.testStatic("Testing..")).thenReturn(mock(ReturnObject.class));
//Here you have to write the test cases
}
In the above example, we have to mock the Tester Class testStatic Method with input param as "Testing...". Here, this method will return a ReturnObject class type object. Hence we write mockito when chain like above.
Don't forget to add below dependency in your Gradle/maven
testImplementation 'org.mockito:mockito-inline:4.3.1'
Use JMockit framework. It worked for me. You don't have to write statements for mocking DBConenction.getConnection() method. Just the below code is enough.
#Mock below is mockit.Mock package
Connection jdbcConnection = Mockito.mock(Connection.class);
MockUp<DBConnection> mockUp = new MockUp<DBConnection>() {
DBConnection singleton = new DBConnection();
#Mock
public DBConnection getInstance() {
return singleton;
}
#Mock
public Connection getConnection() {
return jdbcConnection;
}
};
There is an easy solution by using java FunctionalInterface and then add that interface as dependency for the class you are trying to unit test.
For mocking static functions i was able to do it that way:
create a wrapper function in some helper class/object. (using a name variant might be beneficial for keeping things separated and maintainable.)
use this wrapper in your codes. (Yes, codes need to be realized with testing in mind.)
mock the wrapper function.
wrapper code snippet (not really functional, just for illustration)
class myWrapperClass ...
def myWrapperFunction (...) {
return theOriginalFunction (...)
}
of course having multiple such functions accumulated in a single wrapper class might be beneficial in terms of code reuse.
Here I share my mockito MockStatic solution based on an extension as promised in my answer to leokom's solution.
So, why does Mockito choose try-with-resources? Well, simply because they want to keep a tidy ship. That is good programming after all. Try-with-resources allows construction with guaranteed calling of the close method. But in JUnit we already have that in BeforeEach and AfterEach. And one can easily add these for a generic purpose to each test class using an Extension that implements BeforeEachCallback and AfterEachCallback.
So much for the theory. Let's make a static mock for
Instant.now()
I started with an annotation to be able to mark the fields in my test class that I want to use as static mocks.
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
#Target(ElementType.FIELD)
public #interface StaticMock {
}
This allows me to create a field in my test class for static mocking that I can easily find in my Extension class.
#StaticMock
private MockedStatic<Instant> staticInstantMock;
I added the Extension I created to my test class. You have two options.
Create an Extension for this purpose and add it to the class next to MockitoExtension, which you also need.
Create an Extension and have it inherit from MockitoExtension. Now you can replace MockitoExtension on your test class.
I used the latter of the two.
#ExtendWith({CompanyMockitoExtension.class})
class MyExtendedTestClass {
Now we need something to be returned for the static when it's called:
#Mock
private Instant now;
staticInstantMock.when(Instant::now).thenReturn(now);
The whole test class:
#ExtendWith({CompanyMockitoExtension.class})
class MyExtendedTestClass {
#StaticMock
private MockedStatic<Instant> staticInstantMock;
#Mock
private Instant now;
#Test
void myTestMethod() {
staticInstantMock.when(Instant::now).thenReturn(now);
assertThat(Instant::now).isSameAs(now); // This would normally happen in the class you are testing...
}
}
Now let's take a look at the Extension class.
import static org.mockito.Mockito.mockStatic;
import java.lang.reflect.Field;
import java.lang.reflect.Method;
import java.util.List;
import org.junit.jupiter.api.extension.ExtensionContext;
import org.mockito.MockedStatic;
import org.mockito.Mockito;
import org.mockito.junit.jupiter.MockitoExtension;
public class CompanyMockitoExtension extends MockitoExtension {
#Override
public void beforeEach(ExtensionContext context) {
super.beforeEach(context); // Don't forget to call the super!!
if (context.getTestInstance().isEmpty()) { // Just to be sure...
return;
}
// Get the unit test instance
Object testSubject = context.getTestInstance().get();
initializeStaticMocks(testSubject);
}
private void initializeStaticMocks(Object testSubject) {
// Find all fields that I want to static mock
List<Field> staticMockFields = ReflectionHelper.getFieldsWithAnnotation(testSubject, StaticMock.class);
staticMockFields.forEach(field -> initializeStaticMock(field, testSubject));
}
private void initializeStaticMock(Field field, Object testSubject) {
// Get the type of the static mock. It is within the generic MockedStatic<> class type.
Class<?> typeForStaticMock = (Class<?>) ReflectionHelper.getTypesForGeneric(field)[0];
try {
// Now set the field with the mockStatic method of Mockito.
field.setAccessible(true);
field.set(testSubject, mockStatic(typeForStaticMock));
} catch (IllegalAccessException e) {
throw new RuntimeException("Failed to instantiate Static Mock with type: " + typeForStaticMock.getName());
}
}
#Override
public void afterEach(ExtensionContext context) {
super.afterEach(context); // Again, do not forget to call the super.
if (context.getTestInstance().isEmpty()) {
return;
}
Object testSubject = context.getTestInstance().get();
closeStaticMocks(testSubject); // Close all static mocks.
}
private void closeStaticMocks(Object testSubject) {
// Again find all fields we annotated
List<Field> staticMockFields = ReflectionHelper.getFieldsWithAnnotation(testSubject, StaticMock.class);
staticMockFields.forEach(field -> closeStaticMock(field, testSubject));
}
private void closeStaticMock(Field field, Object testSubject) {
// Get the instance and simply call close.
MockedStatic<?> mockedStaticInstance = ReflectionHelper.getFieldInstance(field, testSubject, MockedStatic.class);
mockedStaticInstance.close();
}
}
The nice thing about this extension is that you can add additional mocking stuff. I added verification of no more interactions on all mocks in the AfterEach. This is now automatic when we use this extension. I also added similar behavior for construction mocking as for the static mocking.
As you see, I made my own reflection helper class. I know there are some standard reflection helper classes and those might be better. Here is mine for this purpose.
public class ReflectionHelper {
public static List<Field> getFieldsWithAnnotation(
Object testSubject,
Class<? extends Annotation> annotationType
) {
Class<?> testSubjectClass = testSubject.getClass();
return Arrays.stream(testSubjectClass.getDeclaredFields())
.filter(field -> field.isAnnotationPresent(annotationType))
.collect(toUnmodifiableList());
}
public static List<Field> getCollectionFields(Object testSubject) {
Class<?> testSubjectClass = testSubject.getClass();
return Arrays.stream(testSubjectClass.getDeclaredFields())
.filter(field -> Collection.class.isAssignableFrom(field.getType()))
.collect(toUnmodifiableList());
}
#SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
public static <T> T getFieldInstance(Field field, Object testSubject, Class<T> type) {
return (T) getFieldInstance(field, testSubject);
}
public static Object getFieldInstance(Field field, Object testSubject) {
try {
boolean isStatic = isStatic(field.getModifiers());
Object context = isStatic ? null : testSubject;
field.setAccessible(true);
return field.get(context);
} catch (IllegalAccessException e) {
throw new RuntimeException("Failed to get instance of field.");
}
}
public static Type[] getTypesForGeneric(Field field) {
ParameterizedType parameterizedType = (ParameterizedType) field.getGenericType();
return parameterizedType.getActualTypeArguments();
}
}
Refactor it a little bit:
public class MySQLDatabaseConnectionFactory implements DatabaseConnectionFactory {
ConnectionSupplier connectionSupplier = () -> SupplierDriverManager.getConnection();
public void setConnSupplier(ConnectionSupplier supplier) {
this.connectionSupplier = supplier;
}
#Override
public Connection getConnection() {
try {
return connectionSupplier.conn();
} catch (SQLException e) {
throw new RuntimeException(e);
}
}
#FunctionalInterface
interface ConnectionSupplier {
Connection conn();
}
}
Then you can use the mockito:
MySQLDatabaseConnectionFactory.ConnectionSupplier connectionSupplier = mock(MySQLDatabaseConnectionFactory.ConnectionSupplier.class);
when(connectionSupplier.conn()).thenReturn(yourMockObject);
yourConnectionFactory.setConnSupplier(connectionSupplier);
I have a static method (foo) that calls another static method (bar). I would like to mock the response of bar in my test. Is this possible with PowerMockito or another tool? the only results I can find are for mocking statics inside of non-static methods.
public class SomeClass {
static List<String> foo() {
...
int barResult = bar();
...
}
static int bar() {
// make a database call
return DAO.getDao().runQuery();
}
}
And my test will call it like:
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
public class SomeClassTest {
#PrepareForTest(SomeClass.class)
#Test
public void fooTest() {
List<String> actualResult = SomeClass.foo();
assertTrue(...);
}
}
Am I going to have to mock the internals of bar? So mock the DAO?
You can't do that.
Only PowerMock allows you to mock static methods. But that works by "erasing" all static things within that class that gets "prepared" for testing by PowerMock.
If you were talking about ordinary methods, you could be going for Mockito spies, as those allow for partial mockings.
And just for the record: simply avoid using static, as using it leads to "hard to test" code.
In other words: instead of using the big ugly powermock hammer to "fix" your design problems... Consider fixing your broken design instead and thereby avoiding the need for PowerMock altogether!
And for the record: yes, you could solve your problem by mocking that static call on the DAO class (then you can control what bar() does indirectly. But again: that would just mean to put the "I tested it" label on code that should be reworked instead.
You can do:
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest({SomeClass.class, DAO.class})
public class SomeClassTest {
#Test
public void fooTest() {
PowerMockito.mockStatic(DAO.class);
Mockito.when(DAO.getDao().runQuery()).return(..);
List<String> actualResult = SomeClass.foo();
assertTrue(...);
}
}
I want to make a JUnit test to assure that some classes don't use a specific set of methods (from another classes). Example
class MyClass
{
void myMethod()
{
otherClass.otherClassStaticMethod();
}
}
class myTest
{
void test()
{
assertFalse(CalledMethods.getMethodsCalledBy("myClass.myMethod").Contains("otherClass.otherClassStaticMethod"));
}
}
In this test I want to assure that myMethod doesn't invocate otherClassStaticMethod. How can I find what methods are being called inside a method in compile time (ignore methods called using reflection)? I thought about a .java parser, do you recommend any?
you can mock "otherClass" and verify that the method isn't invoked. E.g. using Mockito you can even specify in which order what methods are supposed to be invoked (under the condition their instances are mocks) and specify which methods are not allowed to be invoked
as coding.mof said, to mock static methods you should use PowerMock/PowerMockito:
example:
PowerMockito.mockStatic(OtherClass.class);
PowerMockito.verifyStatic(never());
OtherClass.otherClassStaticMethod();
It sounds like you should be using a mock library and let that handle it all for you. I'd recommend JMock as my library of choice. If you're using instance methods then this would be perfect for you - if, as your example shows, it's static methods then PowerMock may work*1.
With JMock, you'd have something like:
public class MyClass {
public MyClass(Dependency dependency) {
this.dependency = dependency;
}
void myMethod() {
dependency.someMethod();
}
}
#RunWith(JMock.class)
public class MyTest {
private Mockery context = new Mockery();
#Test
public void doesNotCallSomeMethod() {
Dependency dependency = context.mock(Dependency.class);
MyClass obj = new MyClass(dependency);
obj.myMethod(); <--- this will fail fast
}
}
When you call obj.myMethod, JMock will instantly report that you never said dependency should have any methods called. It will also tell you what method you DID call and what parameters you passed in if any
*1 I don't use PowerMock as I steer away from static methods unless they are pure functions
public class A {
public void method(boolean b){
if (b == true)
method1();
else
method2();
}
private void method1() {}
private void method2() {}
}
public class TestA {
#Test
public void testMethod() {
A a = mock(A.class);
a.method(true);
//how to test like verify(a).method1();
}
}
How to test private method is called or not, and how to test private method using mockito?
Not possible through mockito. From their wiki
Why Mockito doesn't mock private methods?
Firstly, we are not dogmatic about mocking private methods. We just
don't care about private methods because from the standpoint of
testing private methods don't exist. Here are a couple of reasons
Mockito doesn't mock private methods:
It requires hacking of classloaders that is never bullet proof and it
changes the api (you must use custom test runner, annotate the class,
etc.).
It is very easy to work around - just change the visibility of method
from private to package-protected (or protected).
It requires me to spend time implementing & maintaining it. And it
does not make sense given point #2 and a fact that it is already
implemented in different tool (powermock).
Finally... Mocking private methods is a hint that there is something
wrong with OO understanding. In OO you want objects (or roles) to
collaborate, not methods. Forget about pascal & procedural code. Think
in objects.
You can't do that with Mockito but you can use Powermock to extend Mockito and mock private methods. Powermock supports Mockito. Here's an example.
Here is a small example how to do it with powermock
public class Hello {
private Hello obj;
private Integer method1(Long id) {
return id + 10;
}
}
To test method1 use code:
Hello testObj = new Hello();
Integer result = Whitebox.invokeMethod(testObj, "method1", new Long(10L));
To set private object obj use this:
Hello testObj = new Hello();
Hello newObject = new Hello();
Whitebox.setInternalState(testObj, "obj", newObject);
While Mockito doesn't provide that capability, you can achieve the same result using Mockito + the JUnit ReflectionUtils class or the Spring ReflectionTestUtils class. Please see an example below taken from here explaining how to invoke a private method:
ReflectionTestUtils.invokeMethod(student, "saveOrUpdate", "From Unit test");
Complete examples with ReflectionTestUtils and Mockito can be found in the book Mockito for Spring.
Official documentation Spring Testing
By using reflection, private methods can be called from test classes.
In this case,
//test method will be like this ...
public class TestA {
#Test
public void testMethod() {
A a= new A();
Method privateMethod = A.class.getDeclaredMethod("method1", null);
privateMethod.setAccessible(true);
// invoke the private method for test
privateMethod.invoke(A, null);
}
}
If the private method calls any other private method, then we need to spy the object and stub the another method.The test class will be like ...
//test method will be like this ...
public class TestA {
#Test
public void testMethod() {
A a= new A();
A spyA = spy(a);
Method privateMethod = A.class.getDeclaredMethod("method1", null);
privateMethod.setAccessible(true);
doReturn("Test").when(spyA, "method2"); // if private method2 is returning string data
// invoke the private method for test
privateMethod.invoke(spyA , null);
}
}
**The approach is to combine reflection and spying the object.
**method1 and **method2 are private methods and method1 calls method2.
Think about this in terms of behaviour, not in terms of what methods there are. The method called method has a particular behaviour if b is true. It has different behaviour if b is false. This means you should write two different tests for method; one for each case. So instead of having three method-oriented tests (one for method, one for method1, one for method2, you have two behaviour-oriented tests.
Related to this (I suggested this in another SO thread recently, and got called a four-letter word as a result, so feel free to take this with a grain of salt); I find it helpful to choose test names that reflect the behaviour that I'm testing, rather than the name of the method. So don't call your tests testMethod(), testMethod1(), testMethod2() and so forth. I like names like calculatedPriceIsBasePricePlusTax() or taxIsExcludedWhenExcludeIsTrue() that indicate what behaviour I'm testing; then within each test method, test only the indicated behaviour. Most such behaviours will involve just one call to a public method, but may involve many calls to private methods.
Hope this helps.
I was able to test a private method inside using mockito using reflection.
Here is the example, tried to name it such that it makes sense
//Service containing the mock method is injected with mockObjects
#InjectMocks
private ServiceContainingPrivateMethod serviceContainingPrivateMethod;
//Using reflection to change accessibility of the private method
Class<?>[] params = new Class<?>[]{PrivateMethodParameterOne.class, PrivateMethodParameterTwo.class};
Method m = serviceContainingPrivateMethod .getClass().getDeclaredMethod("privateMethod", params);
//making private method accessible
m.setAccessible(true);
assertNotNull(m.invoke(serviceContainingPrivateMethod, privateMethodParameterOne, privateMethodParameterTwo).equals(null));
You're not suppose to test private methods. Only non-private methods needs to be tested as these should call the private methods anyway. If you "want" to test private methods, it may indicate that you need to rethink your design:
Am I using proper dependency injection?
Do I possibly needs to move the private methods into a separate class and rather test that?
Must these methods be private? ...can't they be default or protected rather?
In the above instance, the two methods that are called "randomly" may actually need to be placed in a class of their own, tested and then injected into the class above.
There is actually a way to test methods from a private member with Mockito. Let's say you have a class like this:
public class A {
private SomeOtherClass someOtherClass;
A() {
someOtherClass = new SomeOtherClass();
}
public void method(boolean b){
if (b == true)
someOtherClass.method1();
else
someOtherClass.method2();
}
}
public class SomeOtherClass {
public void method1() {}
public void method2() {}
}
If you want to test a.method will invoke a method from SomeOtherClass, you can write something like below.
#Test
public void testPrivateMemberMethodCalled() {
A a = new A();
SomeOtherClass someOtherClass = Mockito.spy(new SomeOtherClass());
ReflectionTestUtils.setField( a, "someOtherClass", someOtherClass);
a.method( true );
Mockito.verify( someOtherClass, Mockito.times( 1 ) ).method1();
}
ReflectionTestUtils.setField(); will stub the private member with something you can spy on.
I don't really understand your need to test the private method. The root problem is that your public method has void as return type, and hence you are not able to test your public method. Hence you are forced to test your private method. Is my guess correct??
A few possible solutions (AFAIK):
Mocking your private methods, but still you won't be "actually" testing your methods.
Verify the state of object used in the method. MOSTLY methods either do some processing of the input values and return an output, or change the state of the objects. Testing the objects for the desired state can also be employed.
public class A{
SomeClass classObj = null;
public void publicMethod(){
privateMethod();
}
private void privateMethod(){
classObj = new SomeClass();
}
}
[Here you can test for the private method, by checking the state change of the classObj from null to not null.]
Refactor your code a little (Hope this is not a legacy code). My funda of writing a method is that, one should always return something (a int/ a boolean). The returned value MAY or MAY NOT be used by the implementation, but it will SURELY BE used by the test
code.
public class A
{
public int method(boolean b)
{
int nReturn = 0;
if (b == true)
nReturn = method1();
else
nReturn = method2();
}
private int method1() {}
private int method2() {}
}
Put your test in the same package, but a different source folder (src/main/java vs. src/test/java) and make those methods package-private. Imo testability is more important than privacy.
In cases where the private method is not void and the return value is used as a parameter to an external dependency's method, you can mock the dependency and use an ArgumentCaptor to capture the return value.
For example:
ArgumentCaptor<ByteArrayOutputStream> csvOutputCaptor = ArgumentCaptor.forClass(ByteArrayOutputStream.class);
//Do your thing..
verify(this.awsService).uploadFile(csvOutputCaptor.capture());
....
assertEquals(csvOutputCaptor.getValue().toString(), "blabla");
Building on #aravind-yarram's answer: Not possible through mockito. From their wiki
So what's the OO way of testing private methods? Private methods with complex logic might be a sign that your class is violating the principle of single responsibility and that some of the logic should be moved to a new class.
Indeed, by extracting those private methods to public methods of more granular classes, you can unit test them without breaking the encapsulation of your original class.