Check if method was called on EasyMock - java

Using EasyMock 3.2. In order to unit test an UI, I have to mock some dependencies. One of them is Page. Base class for UI tests looks like this:
abstract class AbstractUiTest {
#Before
public function setUpUiDependencies() {
Page page = createNiceMock(Page.class);
Ui.setCurrentPage(page);
}
}
Most of the time I don't use the page explicity, it's just there not to throw NullPointerException when e.g. Ui calls getPage().setTitle("sth") etc.
However, in a few tests I want to explicity check if something has happend with the page, e.g.:
public class SomeTest extends AbstractUiTest {
#Test
public void testNotification() {
// do something with UI that should cause notification
assertNotificationHasBeenShown();
}
private void assertNotificationHasBeenShown() {
Page page = Ui.getCurrentPage(); // this is my nice mock
// HERE: verify somehow, that page.showNotification() has been called
}
}
How to implement the assertion method? I would really want to implement it without recording behavior to the page, replaying and verifying it. My problem is a bit more complicated, but you should get the point.

EDIT: I think that perhaps this is not really needed, since simply using replay and verify should check that the expected methods were actually called. But you said you want to do this without replaying and verifying. Can you explain why you have that requirement?
I think that you can use andAnswer and an IAnswer. You don't mention what the return value of page.showNotification() is. Assuming it returns a String, you could do this:
import static org.easymock.EasyMock.expect;
import static org.junit.Assert.assertTrue;
import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicBoolean;
import org.easymock.IAnswer;
import org.junit.Ignore;
import org.junit.Test;
public class SomeTest extends AbstractUiTest {
#Test
public void shouldCallShowNotification() {
final AtomicBoolean showNotificationCalled = new AtomicBoolean();
expect(page.showNotification()).andAnswer(new IAnswer<String>() {
#Override
public String answer() {
showNotificationCalled.set(true);
return "";
}
});
replay(page);
Ui.getCurrentPage();
verify(page);
assertTrue("showNotification not called", showNotificationCalled.get());
}
}
If showNotification returns void, I believe you would need to do this:
import static org.easymock.EasyMock.expectLastCall;
import static org.junit.Assert.assertTrue;
import java.util.concurrent.atomic.AtomicBoolean;
import org.easymock.IAnswer;
import org.junit.Ignore;
import org.junit.Test;
public class SomeTest extends AbstractUiTest {
#Test
public void shouldCallShowNotification() {
final AtomicBoolean showNotificationCalled = new AtomicBoolean();
page.showNotification();
expectLastCall().andAnswer(new IAnswer<Void>() {
#Override
public Void answer() {
showNotificationCalled.set(true);
return null;
}
});
replay(page);
Ui.getCurrentPage();
verify(page);
assertTrue("showNotification not called", showNotificationCalled.get());
}
}
Note: I've used an AtomicBoolean to record whether the method was called. You could also use a boolean array of a single element, or your own mutable object. I used AtomicBoolean not for its concurrency properties, but simply because it is a handy mutable boolean object that is already present in the Java standard libraries.
The other thing that I have done to verify that a method was being called is to not use a mock at all, but to create an instance of Page as an anonymous inner class and override the showNotification method, and record somewhere that the call occurred.

Use a nice mock in the tests where you don't care what happens to page and a normal mock in those tests where you want to test something explicit - and use expect, verify etc. I.e. have two variables in your setup method: nicePage (acts as a stub) and mockPage (acts as a mock)

Related

instantiate object from derived class with constructor that takes super argument

Maybe what I am trying to do is not worthwhile, it sure feels that way after spending many days on it.
I have A Base Class shown here:
package jimmy.kilmer.com;
import java.awt.Color;
import jarPackageImports.AI;
import jarPackageImports.MovementAction;
import jarPackageImports.Info;
import jarPackageImports.PlayerAction;
public class GameAI extends AI {
public gameAI(Info info) {
super(info);
setJerseyNumber(32);
}
public Color getColor() {
return Color.RED;
}
public String getName() {
return "Usain Bolt";
}
public PlayerAction update() {
// TODO game movement actions
// all available methods not listed here...
info.getVelocity();
info.getX();
info.getY();
MovementAction steeringBehavior = null;
return steeringBehavior;
}
//basically used for testing setup
public int[][] populateAllPossibleNodes() {
int[][] allPossibleNodes = new int[screenWidth/20][screenHeight/20];
return allPossibleNodes;
}
}
I have been given a jar, that sets up the game environment. It uses reflection for the setup. I am not familiar with reflection, unfortunately, as I am more beginner level.
I have read a lot about TDD, and am convinced that can help me stay orderly, and code in a disciplined way. I have some say that TDD is not really useful for Game development, which the arguments may be true, in regard to making an "enjoyable game." But, from a purely coding standpoint, I remain steadfast in my believe that TDD is the way to go. But, that remains to be seen, since it is still theoretical. I would like to try it.
I have installed Junit 5, and have done many tutorials, but it's all pretty basic examples. My particular test case uses reflection, super classes, derived classes, dynamic data. My head is spinning.
My goal is just to get setup such that I can start doing some Test driven development.
Here is my Junit test class:
package jimmy.kilmer.com;
import static org.junit.jupiter.api.Assertions.*;
import org.junit.jupiter.api.AfterAll;
import org.junit.jupiter.api.AfterEach;
import org.junit.jupiter.api.BeforeAll;
import org.junit.jupiter.api.BeforeEach;
import org.junit.jupiter.api.Test;
import jarPackageImports.Info;
class GameAITest {
private GameAITest AIObject;
private jarPackageImports.Info info;
#BeforeEach
void setUp() throws Exception {
AIObject = new GameAITest(info);
#AfterEach
void tearDown() throws Exception {
}
#Test
void testPopulateAllPossibleNodes() {
// 1. given/arrange
int[][] array1 = new int[80][65];
// 2. when/act
int[][] array2 = AIObject.populateAllPossibleNodes();
// 3. then/assert
assertArrayEquals(array1, array2);
}
}
That is my best stab so far, but it still get a compile error. Specifically:
java.lang.NullPointerException:Cannot invoke "jarPackageImports.Info.getScene()" because "this.info" is null
In summation:
maybe everything I am trying is rubbish?
Do I need to use dynamic junit testing? I would have to read up on that.
Do I need to mock (use Mockito?) to instantiate an object to test? I would need to read up on that as well.
Is it possible to instantiate an object from GameAI? Do I need to/how would I use relection to do that? class.getConstructors()? And, I would have to read up on that.
thanks in advance.

JUnit5 - How to get test result in AfterTestExecutionCallback

I write JUnit5 Extension. But I cannot find way how to obtain test result.
Extension looks like this:
import org.junit.jupiter.api.extension.AfterTestExecutionCallback;
import org.junit.jupiter.api.extension.TestExtensionContext;
public class TestResultExtension implements AfterTestExecutionCallback {
#Override
public void afterTestExecution(TestExtensionContext context) throws Exception {
//How to get test result? SUCCESS/FAILED
}
}
Any hints how to obtain test result?
This work for me:
public class RunnerExtension implements AfterTestExecutionCallback {
#Override
public void afterTestExecution(ExtensionContext context) throws Exception {
Boolean testResult = context.getExecutionException().isPresent();
System.out.println(testResult); //false - SUCCESS, true - FAILED
}
}
#ExtendWith(RunnerExtension.class)
public abstract class Tests {
}
As other answers point out, JUnit communicates failed tests with exceptions, so an AfterTestExecutionCallback can be used to gleam what happened. Note that this is error prone as extension running later might still fail the test.
Another way to do that is to register a custom TestExecutionListener. Both of these approaches are a little roundabout, though. There is an issue that tracks a specific extension point for reacting to test results, which would likely be the most straight-forward answer to your question. If you can provide a specific use case, it would be great if you could head over to #542 and leave a comment describing it.
You can use SummaryGeneratingListener from org.junit.platform.launcher.listeners
It contains MutableTestExecutionSummary field, which implements TestExecutionSummary interface, and this way you can obtain info about containers, tests, time, failures etc.
You can create custom listener, for example:
Create class that extends SummaryGeneratingListener
public class ResultAnalyzer extends SummaryGeneratingListener {
#Override
public void testPlanExecutionFinished(TestPlan testPlan) {
//This method is invoked after all tests in all containers is finished
super.testPlanExecutionFinished(testPlan);
analyzeResult();
}
private void analyzeResult() {
var summary = getSummary();
var failures = summary.getFailures();
//Do something
}
}
Register listener by creating file
src\main\resources\META-INF\services\org.junit.platform.launcher.TestExecutionListener
and specify your implementation in it
path.to.class.ResultAnalyzer
Enable auto-detection of extensions, set parameter
-Djunit.jupiter.extensions.autodetection.enabled=true
And that's it!
Docs
https://junit.org/junit5/docs/5.0.0/api/org/junit/platform/launcher/listeners/SummaryGeneratingListener.html
https://junit.org/junit5/docs/5.0.0/api/org/junit/platform/launcher/listeners/TestExecutionSummary.html
https://junit.org/junit5/docs/current/user-guide/#extensions-registration-automatic
I have only this solution:
String testResult = context.getTestException().isPresent() ? "FAILED" : "OK";
It seems that it works well. But I am not sure if it will work correctly in all situations.
Fails in JUnit are propagated with exceptions. There are several exceptions, which indicate various types of errors.
So an exception in TestExtensionContext#getTestException() indicates an error. The method can't manipulate actual test results, so depending on your use case you might want to implement TestExecutionExceptionHandler, which allows you to swallow exceptions, thus changing whether a test succeeded or not.
You're almost there.
To implement a test execution callback and get the test result for logging (or generating a report) you can do the following:
import org.junit.jupiter.api.extension.AfterTestExecutionCallback;
import org.junit.jupiter.api.extension.ExtensionContext;
public class TestResultExtension implements AfterTestExecutionCallback
{
#Override
public void afterTestExecution(ExtensionContext context) throws Exception
{
// check the context for an exception
Boolean passed = context.getExecutionException().isEmpty();
// if there isn't, the test passed
String result = passed ? "PASSED" : "FAILED";
// now that you have the result, you can do whatever you want
System.out.println("Test Result: " + context.getDisplayName() + " " + result);
}
}
And then you just add the TestResultExtension using the #ExtendWith() annotation for your test cases:
import org.junit.jupiter.api.Test;
import org.junit.jupiter.api.extension.ExtendWith;
import static org.junit.jupiter.api.Assertions.assertTrue;
#ExtendWith(TestResultExtension.class)
public class SanityTest
{
#Test
public void testSanity()
{
assertTrue(true);
}
#Test
public void testInsanity()
{
assertTrue(false);
}
}
It's a good idea to extend a base test that includes the extension
import org.junit.jupiter.api.extension.ExtendWith;
#ExtendWith(TestResultExtension.class)
public class BaseTest
{}
And then you don't need to include the annotation in every test:
public class SanityTest extends BaseTest
{ //... }

Alternative of mocking a static method present in some jar

I know that if I need to mock a static method, this indicates that my design has some issue, but in my case this does not seem to be a design issue.
BundleContext bundleContext = FrameworkUtil.getBundle(ConfigService.class).getBundleContext();
Here FrameworkUtil is a class present in an api jar. Using it in code cant be a design issue.
my problem here is while running this line
FrameworkUtil.getBundle(ConfigService.class);
returns null So my question, is there any way by which I can replace that null at runtime
I am using Mockito framewrok and my project does not allow me to use powermock.
if I use
doReturn(bundle).when(FrameworkUtil.class)
in this way getBundle method is not visible since its a static method.
You are correct that is not a design issue on your part. Without PowerMock, your options become a bit murkier, though.
I would suggest creating a non-static wrapper for the FrameworkUtil class that you can inject and mock.
Update: (David Wallace)
So you add a new class to your application, something like this
public class UtilWrapper {
public Bundle getBundle(Class<?> theClass) {
return FrameworkUtil.getBundle(theClass);
}
}
This class is so simple that you don't need to unit test it. As a general principle, you should only EVER write unit tests for methods that have some kind of logic to them - branching, looping or exception handling. One-liners should NOT be unit tested.
Now, within your application code, add a field of type UtilWrapper, and a setter for it, to every class that currently calls FrameworkUtil.getBundle. Add this line to the construtor of each such class
utilWrapper = new UtilWrapper();
And replace every call to FrameworkUtil.getBundle with utilWrapper.getBundle.
Now in your test, you make a mock UtilWrapper and stub it to return whatever Bundle you like.
when(mockUtilWrapper.getBundle(ConfigService.class)).thenReturn(someBundleYouMade);
and for the class that you're testing, call setUtilWrapper(mockUtilWrapper) or whatever. You don't need this last step if you're using #InjectMocks.
Now your test should all hang together, but using your mocked UtilWrapper instead of the one that relies on FrameworkUtil.
unit test
package x;
import static org.junit.Assert.*;
import org.junit.Before;
import org.junit.Test;
import org.mockito.Mockito;
public class GunTest {
#Before
public void setUp() throws Exception {
}
#Test
public void testFireTrue() {
final Gun unit = Mockito.spy(new Gun());
Mockito.doReturn(5).when(unit).getCount();
assertTrue(unit.fire2());
}
#Test
public void testFireFalse() {
final Gun unit = Mockito.spy(new Gun());
Mockito.doReturn(15).when(unit).getCount();
assertFalse(unit.fire2());
}
}
the unit:
fire calls the static method directly,
fire2 factors out the static call to a protected method:
package x;
public class Gun {
public boolean fire() {
if (StaticClass.getCount() > 10) {
return false;
}
else {
return true;
}
}
public boolean fire2() {
if (getCount() > 10) {
return false;
}
else {
return true;
}
}
protected int getCount() {
return StaticClass.getCount();
}
}

How to disable TestNG test based on a condition

Is there currently a way to disable TestNG test based on a condition
I know you can currently disable test as so in TestNG:
#Test(enabled=false, group={"blah"})
public void testCurrency(){
...
}
I will like to disable the same test based on a condition but dont know how. something Like this:
#Test(enabled={isUk() ? false : true), group={"blah"})
public void testCurrency(){
...
}
Anyone has a clue on whether this is possible or not.
An easier option is to use the #BeforeMethod annotation on a method which checks your condition. If you want to skip the tests, then just throw a SkipException. Like this:
#BeforeMethod
protected void checkEnvironment() {
if (!resourceAvailable) {
throw new SkipException("Skipping tests because resource was not available.");
}
}
You have two options:
Implement an annotation transformer.
Use BeanShell.
Your annotation transformer would test the condition and then override the #Test annotation to add the attribute "enabled=false" if the condition is not satisfied.
There are two ways that I know of that allow you the control of "disabling" tests in TestNG.
The differentiation that is very important to note is that SkipException will break out off all subsequent tests while implmenting IAnnotationTransformer uses Reflection to disbale individual tests, based on a condition that you specify. I will explain both SkipException and IAnnotationTransfomer.
SKIP Exception example
import org.testng.*;
import org.testng.annotations.*;
public class TestSuite
{
// You set this however you like.
boolean myCondition;
// Execute before each test is run
#BeforeMethod
public void before(Method methodName){
// check condition, note once you condition is met the rest of the tests will be skipped as well
if(myCondition)
throw new SkipException();
}
#Test(priority = 1)
public void test1(){}
#Test(priority = 2)
public void test2(){}
#Test(priority = 3)
public void test3(){}
}
IAnnotationTransformer example
A bit more complicated but the idea behind it is a concept known as Reflection.
Wiki - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflection_(computer_programming)
First implement the IAnnotation interface, save this in a *.java file.
import java.lang.reflect.Constructor;
import java.lang.reflect.Method;
import org.testng.IAnnotationTransformer;
import org.testng.annotations.ITestAnnotation;
public class Transformer implements IAnnotationTransformer {
// Do not worry about calling this method as testNG calls it behind the scenes before EVERY method (or test).
// It will disable single tests, not the entire suite like SkipException
public void transform(ITestAnnotation annotation, Class testClass, Constructor testConstructor, Method testMethod){
// If we have chose not to run this test then disable it.
if (disableMe()){
annotation.setEnabled(false);
}
}
// logic YOU control
private boolean disableMe() {
}
}
Then in you test suite java file do the following in the #BeforeClass function
import org.testng.*;
import org.testng.annotations.*;
/* Execute before the tests run. */
#BeforeClass
public void before(){
TestNG testNG = new TestNG();
testNG.setAnnotationTransformer(new Transformer());
}
#Test(priority = 1)
public void test1(){}
#Test(priority = 2)
public void test2(){}
#Test(priority = 3)
public void test3(){}
One last step is to ensure that you add a listener in your build.xml file.
Mine ended up looking like this, this is just a single line from the build.xml:
<testng classpath="${test.classpath}:${build.dir}" outputdir="${report.dir}"
haltonfailure="false" useDefaultListeners="true"
listeners="org.uncommons.reportng.HTMLReporter,org.uncommons.reportng.JUnitXMLReporter,Transformer"
classpathref="reportnglibs"></testng>
I prefer this annotation based way for disable/skip some tests based on environment settings. Easy to maintain and not requires any special coding technique.
Using the IInvokedMethodListener interface
Create a custom anntotation e.g.: #SkipInHeadlessMode
Throw SkipException
public class ConditionalSkipTestAnalyzer implements IInvokedMethodListener {
protected static PropertiesHandler properties = new PropertiesHandler();
#Override
public void beforeInvocation(IInvokedMethod invokedMethod, ITestResult result) {
Method method = result.getMethod().getConstructorOrMethod().getMethod();
if (method == null) {
return;
}
if (method.isAnnotationPresent(SkipInHeadlessMode.class)
&& properties.isHeadlessMode()) {
throw new SkipException("These Tests shouldn't be run in HEADLESS mode!");
}
}
#Override
public void afterInvocation(IInvokedMethod iInvokedMethod, ITestResult iTestResult) {
//Auto generated
}
}
Check for the details:
https://www.lenar.io/skip-testng-tests-based-condition-using-iinvokedmethodlistener/
A Third option also can be Assumption
Assumptions for TestNG - When a assumption fails, TestNG will be instructed to ignore the test case and will thus not execute it.
Using the #Assumption annotation
Using AssumptionListener Using the Assumes.assumeThat(...)
method
You can use this example: Conditionally Running Tests In TestNG
Throwing a SkipException in a method annotated with #BeforeMethod did not work for me because it skipped all the remaining tests of my test suite with no regards if a SkipException were thrown for those tests.
I did not investigate it thoroughly but I found another way : using the dependsOnMethods attribute on the #Test annotation:
import org.testng.SkipException;
import org.testng.annotations.Test;
public class MyTest {
private boolean conditionX = true;
private boolean conditionY = false;
#Test
public void isConditionX(){
if(!conditionX){
throw new SkipException("skipped because of X is false");
}
}
#Test
public void isConditionY(){
if(!conditionY){
throw new SkipException("skipped because of Y is false");
}
}
#Test(dependsOnMethods="isConditionX")
public void test1(){
}
#Test(dependsOnMethods="isConditionY")
public void test2(){
}
}
SkipException: It's useful in case of we have only one #Test method in the class. Like for Data Driven Framework, I have only one Test method which need to either executed or skipped on the basis of some condition. Hence I've put the logic for checking the condition inside the #Test method and get desired result.
It helped me to get the Extent Report with test case result as Pass/Fail and particular Skip as well.

Comprehensive Pros/Cons of Mocking Frameworks for GWT

I'm interested in using the right mocking framework for my GWT app. It's my understanding that Mockito, EasyMock, and jMock are some of the most popular for Java. Could someone list pros/cons for the mocking framework that they are most familiar with as it relates to GWT to help fellow GWT testing noobs like myself?
Thanks in advance.
For the server side testing (RPC services) you can use any mocking framework you wish. spring-test library might be useful for mocking HttpRequest, HttpSession, and other classes of servlet api. Still you might have problems with testing classes extending RemoteServiceServlet, as they require properly encoded request. Here is interesting project which solves this problem:
http://www.gdevelop.com/w/blog/2010/01/10/testing-gwt-rpc-services/
When it comes to testing of client side GWT code (the part which is compiled into Java Script), you can extend GWTTestCase. However due to limited emulation of JRE library, lack of reflection API in particular, it would be impossible to use any mocking framework. What is more, GWTTestCase runtime is very slow, and for this reason consider as a base for integration testing rather than unit testing.
It is possible to create unit tests for GWT client code if GWT application follows Model View Presenter pattern. Assuming we are testing so called "Presenter" (logic) we can mock so called "Display" with any mocking framework. Here is example unit test using Mockito:
import static org.mockito.BDDMockito.*;
import org.junit.Test;
import com.google.gwt.user.client.ui.HasText;
public class ResultPresenterTest {
#Test
public void shouldSetItWorksResultText() {
// given
ResultPresenter.Display display = mock(ResultPresenter.Display.class);
MockButton button = new MockButton();
HasText label = mock(HasText.class);
given(display.getShowResultButton()).willReturn(button);
given(display.getResultLabel()).willReturn(label);
ResultPresenter presenter = new ResultPresenter();
presenter.bind(display);
// when
button.click();
// then
verify(label).setText("It works");
}
}
Here is the presenter:
import com.google.gwt.event.dom.client.ClickEvent;
import com.google.gwt.event.dom.client.ClickHandler;
import com.google.gwt.event.dom.client.HasClickHandlers;
import com.google.gwt.user.client.ui.HasText;
public class ResultPresenter {
private Display display;
public interface Display {
HasClickHandlers getShowResultButton();
HasText getResultLabel();
}
public void bind(final Display display) {
this.display = display;
display.getShowResultButton().addClickHandler(new ClickHandler() {
#Override
public void onClick(ClickEvent event) {
showResult();
}
});
}
public void showResult() {
display.getResultLabel().setText("It works");
}
}
And here is small helper class:
import com.google.gwt.event.dom.client.ClickEvent;
import com.google.gwt.event.dom.client.ClickHandler;
import com.google.gwt.event.dom.client.HasClickHandlers;
import com.google.gwt.event.shared.GwtEvent;
import com.google.gwt.event.shared.HandlerManager;
import com.google.gwt.event.shared.HandlerRegistration;
public class MockButton implements HasClickHandlers {
private HandlerManager handlerManager = new HandlerManager(this);
public void click() {
handlerManager.fireEvent(new ClickEvent() {
});
}
#Override
public HandlerRegistration addClickHandler(ClickHandler handler) {
return handlerManager.addHandler(ClickEvent.getType(), handler);
}
#Override
public void fireEvent(GwtEvent<?> event) {
handlerManager.fireEvent(event);
}
}
It would make sense to call presenter.showResult() in 'when' section instead of button.click(), however as you can see mocking of event circulation is also possible.
Google GIN might be very useful, as it allows to bind different instances depending on runtime/test context. On non-GWTTestCase presenter test GIN can be replaced with Guice.
The com.google.gwt.junit.GWTMockUtilities might be also very useful.
We're happily using Gwt-test-utils for our GWT project.
Mocking RPC calls with mockito is really easy :
First you declare your mocked service in your test :
#Mock
private ServiceAsync service;
then when you want to mock a successful callback :
doSuccessCallback(result).when(service).myMethod(eq("argument"), any(AsyncCallback.class));
More on that : http://code.google.com/p/gwt-test-utils/wiki/MockingRpcServices

Categories