Using Java annotations to generate some code within a method - java

I would annotate a Java method in order to run some code before the method body is executed and before the method returns to the caller. I read about code generation at compile time using Java annotation.
The signature of the method I would annotate is as in the following example.
public Output process(Input arg0) {
// ...
// body that creates output object as processing result of arg0
// ...
return output;
}
I would annotate the above method in order to log the input argument before the method body is executed and to log the output data before the method returns to the caller.
I hypothesized an annotation like the following one.
#Log(input = "arg0", inputDest = "log1.txt", outputDest = "log2.txt")
The above annotation should generate (at compile time) some code like the following.
public Output process(Input arg0) {
SampleLogger.log(arg0, "log1.txt"); // <-- generated code
// ...
// body that creates Output object as processing result of arg0
// ...
SampleLogger.log(output, "log2.txt"); // <-- generated code
return output;
}
How to achieve this?

Yes, you can. But you should not use compile code generation. As the comment above mentioned, project lombok do such genration in compile period. But it is trick. It uses so many private API which let the project complex and hard to maintain.
What you really need is to enter into the method invocation so that you can enhance the method implematation. That is what AOP do.
For your requirenemnt, there are many libraries can do it. Such as Cglib, AspectJ, Spring AOP. Here give you a simple Cglib sample
public static void main(String[] arg) {
YourClass actualInstance = new YourClass();
YourClass instanceToUse = (YourClass) Enhancer.create(YourClass.class, (MethodInterceptor) (obj, method, args, proxy) -> {
System.out.println("enter the method: " + method.getName());
Object result = method.invoke(actualInstance, args);
System.out.println("exit the method: " + method.getName());
return result;
});
instanceToUse.process();
}
public static class YourClass {
public Object process() {
System.out.println("do something");
return new Object();
}
}

Related

How to make a Rest API call inside a custom annotation?

I want to make a REST API call which return a boolean value as a part of the custom annotation.
Sample Code :
**#CustomAnnotation
public String myMethod(){
// my implementation
}**
Only if the boolean value from the REST call is true, the method "myMethod must get triggered and implementation should happen else throw an exception similar to #NotNull .
I was wondering if this is possible, if yes someone please help me out.
you can create a simple custom annotation without worrying about code to call rest.
For executing rest call code ->
Read about how to apply aspect oriented programming.
Basically using aop (apsect oriented programming), you can write a code such that for any method which is annotated with your custom annotation, you wish to execute some piece of code before calling your method.
To do this in spring
#Target(ElementType.METHOD)
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
#interface CustomAnnotation {
String value() default "";
}
#Pointcut(value = "#annotation(CustomAnnotation)") // full path to CustomAnnotation class
public void abc() {
}
#Around("abc()")
public Object executeSomePieceOfCode(ProceedingJoinPoint joinPoint) throws Throwable {
System.out.println("this executes before calling method");
// YOUR CODE TO CALL REST API
boolean responseFromRestCall = true; // this flag is set based on response from rest call
if(responseFromRestCall) {
// this excutes your method
Object obj = joinPoint.proceed();
MethodSignature signature = (MethodSignature) joinPoint.getSignature();
Method method = signature.getMethod();
CustomAnnotation myAnnotation = method.getAnnotation(CustomAnnotation.class);
String value = myAnnotation.value();
System.out.println("value : + " + value);
return obj;
} else {
// currently throwing RuntimeException. You can throw any other custom exception.
throw new RuntimeException();
}
}

How to test a void method using JUnit using Mockito [duplicate]

How to mock methods with void return type?
I implemented an observer pattern but I can't mock it with Mockito because I don't know how.
And I tried to find an example on the Internet but didn't succeed.
My class looks like this:
public class World {
List<Listener> listeners;
void addListener(Listener item) {
listeners.add(item);
}
void doAction(Action goal,Object obj) {
setState("i received");
goal.doAction(obj);
setState("i finished");
}
private string state;
//setter getter state
}
public class WorldTest implements Listener {
#Test public void word{
World w= mock(World.class);
w.addListener(this);
...
...
}
}
interface Listener {
void doAction();
}
The system is not triggered with mock.
I want to show the above-mentioned system state. And make assertions according to them.
Take a look at the Mockito API docs. As the linked document mentions (Point # 12) you can use any of the doThrow(),doAnswer(),doNothing(),doReturn() family of methods from Mockito framework to mock void methods.
For example,
Mockito.doThrow(new Exception()).when(instance).methodName();
or if you want to combine it with follow-up behavior,
Mockito.doThrow(new Exception()).doNothing().when(instance).methodName();
Presuming that you are looking at mocking the setter setState(String s) in the class World below is the code uses doAnswer method to mock the setState.
World mockWorld = mock(World.class);
doAnswer(new Answer<Void>() {
public Void answer(InvocationOnMock invocation) {
Object[] args = invocation.getArguments();
System.out.println("called with arguments: " + Arrays.toString(args));
return null;
}
}).when(mockWorld).setState(anyString());
I think I've found a simpler answer to that question, to call the real method for just one method (even if it has a void return) you can do this:
Mockito.doCallRealMethod().when(<objectInstance>).<method>();
<objectInstance>.<method>();
Or, you could call the real method for all methods of that class, doing this:
<Object> <objectInstance> = mock(<Object>.class, Mockito.CALLS_REAL_METHODS);
Adding to what #sateesh said, when you just want to mock a void method in order to prevent the test from calling it, you could use a Spy this way:
World world = new World();
World spy = Mockito.spy(world);
Mockito.doNothing().when(spy).methodToMock();
When you want to run your test, make sure you call the method in test on the spy object and not on the world object. For example:
assertEquals(0, spy.methodToTestThatShouldReturnZero());
The solution of so-called problem is to use a spy Mockito.spy(...) instead of a mock Mockito.mock(..).
Spy enables us to partial mocking. Mockito is good at this matter. Because you have class which is not complete, in this way you mock some required place in this class.
First of all: you should always import mockito static, this way the code will be much more readable (and intuitive):
import static org.mockito.Mockito.*;
For partial mocking and still keeping original functionality on the rest mockito offers "Spy".
You can use it as follows:
private World world = spy(new World());
To eliminate a method from being executed you could use something like this:
doNothing().when(someObject).someMethod(anyObject());
to give some custom behaviour to a method use "when" with an "thenReturn":
doReturn("something").when(this.world).someMethod(anyObject());
For more examples please find the excellent mockito samples in the doc.
How to mock void methods with mockito - there are two options:
doAnswer - If we want our mocked void method to do something (mock the behavior despite being void).
doThrow - Then there is Mockito.doThrow() if you want to throw an exception from the mocked void method.
Following is an example of how to use it (not an ideal usecase but just wanted to illustrate the basic usage).
#Test
public void testUpdate() {
doAnswer(new Answer<Void>() {
#Override
public Void answer(InvocationOnMock invocation) throws Throwable {
Object[] arguments = invocation.getArguments();
if (arguments != null && arguments.length > 1 && arguments[0] != null && arguments[1] != null) {
Customer customer = (Customer) arguments[0];
String email = (String) arguments[1];
customer.setEmail(email);
}
return null;
}
}).when(daoMock).updateEmail(any(Customer.class), any(String.class));
// calling the method under test
Customer customer = service.changeEmail("old#test.com", "new#test.com");
//some asserts
assertThat(customer, is(notNullValue()));
assertThat(customer.getEmail(), is(equalTo("new#test.com")));
}
#Test(expected = RuntimeException.class)
public void testUpdate_throwsException() {
doThrow(RuntimeException.class).when(daoMock).updateEmail(any(Customer.class), any(String.class));
// calling the method under test
Customer customer = service.changeEmail("old#test.com", "new#test.com");
}
}
You could find more details on how to mock and test void methods with Mockito in my post How to mock with Mockito (A comprehensive guide with examples)
In Java 8 this can be made a little cleaner, assuming you have a static import for org.mockito.Mockito.doAnswer:
doAnswer(i -> {
// Do stuff with i.getArguments() here
return null;
}).when(*mock*).*method*(*methodArguments*);
The return null; is important and without it the compile will fail with some fairly obscure errors as it won't be able to find a suitable override for doAnswer.
For example an ExecutorService that just immediately executes any Runnable passed to execute() could be implemented using:
doAnswer(i -> {
((Runnable) i.getArguments()[0]).run();
return null;
}).when(executor).execute(any());
Adding another answer to the bunch (no pun intended)...
You do need to call the doAnswer method if you can't\don't want to use spy's. However, you don't necessarily need to roll your own Answer. There are several default implementations. Notably, CallsRealMethods.
In practice, it looks something like this:
doAnswer(new CallsRealMethods()).when(mock)
.voidMethod(any(SomeParamClass.class));
Or:
doAnswer(Answers.CALLS_REAL_METHODS.get()).when(mock)
.voidMethod(any(SomeParamClass.class));
I think your problems are due to your test structure. I've found it difficult to mix mocking with the traditional method of implementing interfaces in the test class (as you've done here).
If you implement the listener as a Mock you can then verify the interaction.
Listener listener = mock(Listener.class);
w.addListener(listener);
world.doAction(..);
verify(listener).doAction();
This should satisfy you that the 'World' is doing the right thing.
If you need to do some operations in the mocked void method, and you need to manipulate the argument that sent to void method; you can combine Mockito.doAnswer with ArgumentCaptor.capture method.
Let's say you have SpaceService that autowires a GalaxyService, which has a void method called someServiceMethod.
You want to write test for one of your method in SpaceService that calls GalaxyService's void method. Your planet is also generated inside SpaceService. So you don't have any chance to mock that.
Here is your sample SpaceService class that you want to write tests for.
class SpaceService {
#Autowired
private GalaxyService galaxyService;
public Date someCoolSpaceServiceMethod() {
// does something
Planet planet = new World();
galaxyService.someServiceMethod(planet); //Planet updated in this method.
return planet.getCurrentTime();
}
}
The GalaxyService.someServiceMethod method expects a planet argument. Does some stuff in the method. See :
GalaxyService {
public void someServiceMethod(Planet planet) {
//do fancy stuff here. about solar system etc.
planet.setTime(someCalculatedTime); // the thing that we want to test.
// some more stuff.
}
}
And you want to test this feature.
Here is an example :
ArgumentCaptor<World> worldCaptor = ArgumentCaptor.forClass(World.class);
Date testDate = new Date();
Mockito.doAnswer(mocked-> {
World capturedWorld = worldCaptor.getValue();
world.updateTime(testDate);
return null;
}).when(galaxyService.someServiceMethod(worldCaptor.capture());
Date result = spaceService.someCoolSpaceServiceMethod();
assertEquals(result, testDate);
In your example you should mock Listener item and use Mockito.verify to check interactions with it

How to flexibly select a single method or class from a long list of sequentially named methods or classes

I know the simple way is to use a switch statement, but that is not what I am asking. I want to know, if I can call a method, based on its name as a String that I can modify from the user's input.
For example, I have a bunch of methods named:
func01
func02
func03
...
I want to call them using a string "func", which I modify by adding a numerical suffix to it, like 01, 02 or 03. I want call them using a few lines of code that will work for any number of methods.
Solution with Reflection
You could use Reflection to call the methods.
import java.lang.reflect.InvocationTargetException;
import java.lang.reflect.Method;
class Main {
public static void main(String args[]) throws Exception {
// Just an example calling all the methods
for (int i = 1; i < 100; i++) {
Object object = invokeMethod("func", i);
if (object != null) {
// Do something with object, cast it, etc. ...
} else {
// Error calling the methods
}
}
}
private static Object invokeMethod(String methodBaseName, int number) {
// Number format will be two digits padded by zeros,
// e.g. 01, 02, ..., 18, ...
// For three digits use "%03d" and so on or calculate
// the digits from the number itself
String methodName = methodBaseName + String.format("%02d", number);
try {
Method methodToInvoke = MethodClass.class.getMethod(methodName);
return methodToInvoke.invoke(new MethodClass());
} catch (NoSuchMethodException | SecurityException
| IllegalAccessException | IllegalArgumentException
| InvocationTargetException e) {
// Alternatively handle this errors
return null;
}
}
}
class MethodClass {
public Object func01() {
// ...
}
// ...
public Object func99() {
// ...
}
}
Alternatively for static methods, just use:
Method method = MethodClass.class.getMethod(...);
method.invoke(MethodClass.class);
If you want to add parameters, modify the code like this:
getMethod(methodName, parameterType1.class, parameterType2.class, ...);
invoke(..., parameter1, parameter2, ...);
If you want to use a return value, just change the return type from Object to the concrete type and cast the return value from invoke to this type, e.g. Integer:
Integer result = (Integer) method.invoke(...);
Important notice
What you are trying to do is very dangerous. Reflection can be a critical harm for the security of your application. You should never allow a user to input a method name to invoke a method, otherwise he or she could potentially call any method to gain control of your application or memory. Beware of this.
You can do it using reflection. If your method is static, use the code like this:
Method method = ClassName.class.getMethod(name, param1.getClass(), param2.getClass(), ..);
method.invoke(ClassName.class, param1, param2, ..);
Or if your method isn't static, use the code like this:
Method method = object.getClass().getMethod(name, param1.getClass(), param2.getClass(), ..);
method.invoke(object, param1, param2, ..);
Reflection is a dangerous and almost impossible feature to use correctly for new Java programmers. Obtaining a method or other object-oriented element via a string is an antipattern; it breaks type safety, is very difficult to maintain and debug, and will cause you endless bugs. I speak from experience.
Instead, use a single method with overrides for each type of action you want, and let object orientation help you. If you really need a string to tell you which logic flow to use, perhaps an enum will rescue you. You can use the valueOf() method to parse the string into a valid enum, then call the desired functionality through each enum constant's implementation of an abstract method in the enum.
public class Processor
{
FOLD
{
#Override
public void process()
{
// fold logic
}
},
SPINDLE
{
#Override
public void process()
{
// spindle logic
}
},
MUTILATE
{
#Override
public void process()
{
// mutilate logic
}
},
;
abstract public void process();
}
Your client code will be similar to
Processor.valueOf(text).process();
with suitable error checking and exception handling, of course.

CGLIB not able to intercept methods in a superclass/superinterface

May be I'm not thinking hard enough or the answer is really elusive. Quick scenario (Try the code out. It compiles).
Consider a legacy interface
public interface LegacyInterfaceNoCodeAvailable{
void logInfo(String message);
}
The consider a legacy implementation of the interface above
public abstract class LegacyClassNoCodeAvailable implements LegacyInterfaceNoCodeAvailable{
public abstract void executeSomething();
public void rockItOldSchool(){
logInfo("bustin' chops, old-school style");
}
#Override
public void logInfo(String message){
System.out.println(message);
}
}
Now I come in as this ambitious person and writes a class for a 'New' system but that runs inside the 'Legacy' framework, hence I have to extend the legacy base class.
public class lass SpankingShiny extends LegacyClassNoCodeAvailable{
public void executeSomething(){
rockItOldSchool();
logInfo("I'm the King around here now");
System.out.println("this new stuff rocks!!");
}
}
Everything works great, just like you would expect:
SpankingShiny shiny = new SpankingShiny();
shiny.executeSomething();
The above code yields (as expected):
bustin' chops, old-school style
I'm the King around here now
this new stuff rocks!!
Now as you can see, the 'System.out.println()' faithfully prints the desired output. But I wish to replace the 'System.out.println()' with a logger.
Problem:
I'm unable to have the CGLIB proxy intercept the method to 'logInfo(string)' and have it print out my desired message through a logger (I have done the logging configuration right by the way). That method invocation 'apparently' does not hit the proxy.
Code:
public class SpankingShinyProxy implements MethodInterceptor{
private SpankingShiny realShiny;
private final Logger logger = Logger.getLogger(SpankingShinyProxy.class);
public SpankingShinyProxy(SpankingShiny realShiny) {
super();
this.realShiny = realShiny;
}
#Override
public Object intercept(Object proxyObj, Method proxyMethod, Object[] methodParams, MethodProxy methodProxy) throws Throwable {
String methodName = proxyMethod.getName();
if("logInfo".equals(methodName)){
logger.info(methodParams[0]);
}
return proxyMethod.invoke(realShiny, methodParams);
}
public static SpankingShiny createProxy(SpankingShiny realObj){
Enhancer e = new Enhancer();
e.setSuperclass(realObj.getClass());
e.setCallback(new SpankingShinyProxy(realObj));
SpankingShiny proxifiedObj = (SpankingShiny) e.create();
return proxifiedObj;
}
}
Main method:
public static void main(String... args) {
SpankingShiny shiny = new SpankingShiny();
shiny.executeSomething();
SpankingShiny shinyO = SpankingShinyProxy.createProxy(shiny);
shinyO.executeSomething();
}
The above code yields (NOT as expected):
bustin' chops, old-school style
I'm the King around here now
this new stuff rocks!!
bustin' chops, old-school style
I'm the King around here now
this new stuff rocks!!
Where would I be going wrong?
Thanks!
I had the same problem. In my case, the realObj was a proxy itself (a Spring Bean - a #Component).
So what I had to do was change the .setSuperClass() part in:
Enhancer e = new Enhancer();
e.setSuperclass(realObj.getClass());
e.setCallback(new SpankingShinyProxy(realObj));
SpankingShiny proxifiedObj = (SpankingShiny) e.create();
I changed:
e.setSuperclass(realObj.getClass());
To:
e.setSuperclass(realObj.getClass().getSuperClass());
This worked because, as said, realObj.getClass() was a CGLIB proxy itself, and that method returned a crazy-name-CGLIB-generated class, such as a.b.c.MyClass$$EnhancerBySpringCGLIB$$1e18666c. When I added .getSuperClass() it returned the class it should have been returning in the first place.
Well, first of all, you are lucky that your proxy is not hit. If you were referencing the actual proxy within intercept, you would end up with an endless loop since your reflective method incocation would get dispatched by the same SpankingShinyProxy. Again and again.
The proxy is not working since you simply delegate the method call executeSomething on your proxy to some unproxied object. You must not use realObj. All method calls must be dispatched by your proxy, also those method calls that are invoked by the must hit the proxy itself!
Change the last line in your intercept method to methodProxy.invokeSuper(proxyObj, args). Then, construct your object by using the Enhancer. If your constructor for SpankingShiny does not need arguments, calling create without any arguments if fine. Otherwise, supply the objects you would normally supply to the constructor to the create method. Then, only use the object that you get from create and you are good.
If you want more information on cglib, you might want to read this blog article: http://mydailyjava.blogspot.no/2013/11/cglib-missing-manual.html

Mocking member variables of a class using Mockito

I am a newbie to development and to unit tests in particular .
I guess my requirement is pretty simple, but I am keen to know others thoughts on this.
Suppose I have two classes like so -
public class First {
Second second ;
public First(){
second = new Second();
}
public String doSecond(){
return second.doSecond();
}
}
class Second {
public String doSecond(){
return "Do Something";
}
}
Let's say I am writing unit test to test First.doSecond() method. However, suppose, i want to Mock Second.doSecond() class like so. I am using Mockito to do this.
public void testFirst(){
Second sec = mock(Second.class);
when(sec.doSecond()).thenReturn("Stubbed Second");
First first = new First();
assertEquals("Stubbed Second", first.doSecond());
}
I am seeing that the mocking does not take effect and the assertion fails.
Is there no way to mock the member variables of a class that I want to test . ?
You need to provide a way of accessing the member variables so you can pass in a mock (the most common ways would be a setter method or a constructor which takes a parameter).
If your code doesn't provide a way of doing this, it's incorrectly factored for TDD (Test Driven Development).
This is not possible if you can't change your code. But I like dependency injection and Mockito supports it:
public class First {
#Resource
Second second;
public First() {
second = new Second();
}
public String doSecond() {
return second.doSecond();
}
}
Your test:
#RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class)
public class YourTest {
#Mock
Second second;
#InjectMocks
First first = new First();
public void testFirst(){
when(second.doSecond()).thenReturn("Stubbed Second");
assertEquals("Stubbed Second", first.doSecond());
}
}
This is very nice and easy.
If you look closely at your code you'll see that the second property in your test is still an instance of Second, not a mock (you don't pass the mock to first in your code).
The simplest way would be to create a setter for second in First class and pass it the mock explicitly.
Like this:
public class First {
Second second ;
public First(){
second = new Second();
}
public String doSecond(){
return second.doSecond();
}
public void setSecond(Second second) {
this.second = second;
}
}
class Second {
public String doSecond(){
return "Do Something";
}
}
....
public void testFirst(){
Second sec = mock(Second.class);
when(sec.doSecond()).thenReturn("Stubbed Second");
First first = new First();
first.setSecond(sec)
assertEquals("Stubbed Second", first.doSecond());
}
Another would be to pass a Second instance as First's constructor parameter.
If you can't modify the code, I think the only option would be to use reflection:
public void testFirst(){
Second sec = mock(Second.class);
when(sec.doSecond()).thenReturn("Stubbed Second");
First first = new First();
Field privateField = PrivateObject.class.
getDeclaredField("second");
privateField.setAccessible(true);
privateField.set(first, sec);
assertEquals("Stubbed Second", first.doSecond());
}
But you probably can, as it's rare to do tests on code you don't control (although one can imagine a scenario where you have to test an external library cause it's author didn't :))
You can mock member variables of a Mockito Mock with ReflectionTestUtils
ReflectionTestUtils.setField(yourMock, "memberFieldName", value);
If you can't change the member variable, then the other way around this is to use powerMockit and call
Second second = mock(Second.class)
when(second.doSecond()).thenReturn("Stubbed Second");
whenNew(Second.class).withAnyArguments.thenReturn(second);
Now the problem is that ANY call to new Second will return the same mocked instance. But in your simple case this will work.
I had the same issue where a private value was not set because Mockito does not call super constructors. Here is how I augment mocking with reflection.
First, I created a TestUtils class that contains many helpful utils including these reflection methods. Reflection access is a bit wonky to implement each time. I created these methods to test code on projects that, for one reason or another, had no mocking package and I was not invited to include it.
public class TestUtils {
// get a static class value
public static Object reflectValue(Class<?> classToReflect, String fieldNameValueToFetch) {
try {
Field reflectField = reflectField(classToReflect, fieldNameValueToFetch);
reflectField.setAccessible(true);
Object reflectValue = reflectField.get(classToReflect);
return reflectValue;
} catch (Exception e) {
fail("Failed to reflect "+fieldNameValueToFetch);
}
return null;
}
// get an instance value
public static Object reflectValue(Object objToReflect, String fieldNameValueToFetch) {
try {
Field reflectField = reflectField(objToReflect.getClass(), fieldNameValueToFetch);
Object reflectValue = reflectField.get(objToReflect);
return reflectValue;
} catch (Exception e) {
fail("Failed to reflect "+fieldNameValueToFetch);
}
return null;
}
// find a field in the class tree
public static Field reflectField(Class<?> classToReflect, String fieldNameValueToFetch) {
try {
Field reflectField = null;
Class<?> classForReflect = classToReflect;
do {
try {
reflectField = classForReflect.getDeclaredField(fieldNameValueToFetch);
} catch (NoSuchFieldException e) {
classForReflect = classForReflect.getSuperclass();
}
} while (reflectField==null || classForReflect==null);
reflectField.setAccessible(true);
return reflectField;
} catch (Exception e) {
fail("Failed to reflect "+fieldNameValueToFetch +" from "+ classToReflect);
}
return null;
}
// set a value with no setter
public static void refectSetValue(Object objToReflect, String fieldNameToSet, Object valueToSet) {
try {
Field reflectField = reflectField(objToReflect.getClass(), fieldNameToSet);
reflectField.set(objToReflect, valueToSet);
} catch (Exception e) {
fail("Failed to reflectively set "+ fieldNameToSet +"="+ valueToSet);
}
}
}
Then I can test the class with a private variable like this. This is useful for mocking deep in class trees that you have no control as well.
#Test
public void testWithRectiveMock() throws Exception {
// mock the base class using Mockito
ClassToMock mock = Mockito.mock(ClassToMock.class);
TestUtils.refectSetValue(mock, "privateVariable", "newValue");
// and this does not prevent normal mocking
Mockito.when(mock.somthingElse()).thenReturn("anotherThing");
// ... then do your asserts
}
I modified my code from my actual project here, in page. There could be a compile issue or two. I think you get the general idea. Feel free to grab the code and use it if you find it useful.
If you want an alternative to ReflectionTestUtils from Spring in mockito, use
Whitebox.setInternalState(first, "second", sec);
Lots of others have already advised you to rethink your code to make it more testable - good advice and usually simpler than what I'm about to suggest.
If you can't change the code to make it more testable, PowerMock: https://code.google.com/p/powermock/
PowerMock extends Mockito (so you don't have to learn a new mock framework), providing additional functionality. This includes the ability to have a constructor return a mock. Powerful, but a little complicated - so use it judiciously.
You use a different Mock runner. And you need to prepare the class that is going to invoke the constructor. (Note that this is a common gotcha - prepare the class that calls the constructor, not the constructed class)
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest({First.class})
Then in your test set-up, you can use the whenNew method to have the constructor return a mock
whenNew(Second.class).withAnyArguments().thenReturn(mock(Second.class));
Yes, this can be done, as the following test shows (written with the JMockit mocking API, which I develop):
#Test
public void testFirst(#Mocked final Second sec) {
new NonStrictExpectations() {{ sec.doSecond(); result = "Stubbed Second"; }};
First first = new First();
assertEquals("Stubbed Second", first.doSecond());
}
With Mockito, however, such a test cannot be written. This is due to the way mocking is implemented in Mockito, where a subclass of the class to be mocked is created; only instances of this "mock" subclass can have mocked behavior, so you need to have the tested code use them instead of any other instance.

Categories