We Keep Coding

Test Method Called Without Having Argument In Test Class

I have a class which takes a message with payload String.
The payload is then split and used to create an Entity which is passed to DAOInterface to persist.
How can you test the call daoInterface.insert(entity) has been made?
To Mock the DAOInterface and then verify the call to DAO requires the entity in the test class i.e.
verify(daoInterface).insert(entity);
Is this bad design i.e. creating the entity at this stage? Should the Sting[] split be passed to the DAOImplementaion and initialized there. Example problem,
public class ServiceClass {
#AutoWire
private DAOInterface daoInterface;
public void serviceMessage(Message<String> message) {
MessageHeaders mh = new MessageHeaders(message.getHeaders());
String[] split = ((String) mh.get("payload")).split("_");
code omitted
...
String type = mh.get("WhatType");
Entity entity = new Entity(split[0], split[1], split[2]);
if (type.equals("one"))
{
daoInterface.insert(entity); //How to test?
}
else
{
if (type.equals("two"))
{
doaInterface.modify(entity); //How to test?
}
}
}
}

You can verify with Mockito Matchers.
If you only care that the method is called with some Entity, you can verify that with
verify(daoInterface).insert(any(Entity.class));
If you care about which Entity, and the Entity class has an equals method, you can make an entity that should be equal to the one created and verify with
verify(daoInterface).insert(eq(expectedEntity);
If it's more complex than either of these cases, you can also write your own argument matchers.

The easiest thing you can do is injecting another collaborator to the service which will transform payload to Entity. This way you can keep control on object creation (Inversion of Control). Something like the example below injected to the ServiceClass should do the job:
interface PayloadTransformer {
public Entity transform(String payload);
}
This way your code will be easy to test and you split responsibilities which is usually a good thing. Have a look on Single Responsibility principle
Pushing transformation logic down to dao is almost never a good idea.
BTW. you can write else if without additional brackets and indentations. It's more readable like:
if (a) {
// do something
} else if (b) {
// do something
} else {
// do something
}
The last advice ServiceClass is really poor name for class. The word class is redundant here. Just name it Service, EntityService, MessageService or something which fits your case well.
I wouldn't name field with suffix *Interface as well. Underneath is some implementation injected, I assume. Better name it entityDao or just dao. It's up to you though :)

If you use a test framework like PowerMock, you can invoke private constructors and private methods in your test. This makes it easy to inject mock objects like a mock DAOInterface so you can retrieve it later and test it's been called.
For example, in PowerMock, to call a private constructor:
public class ServiceClass{
#Autowire
private final DAOInterface dao;
public ServiceClass() {
}
private ServiceClass(DAOInterface dao) {
this.dao = dao;
}
}
You simply do:
PrivateConstructorInstantiationDemo instance = WhiteBox.invokeConstructor(
PrivateConstructorInstantiationDemo.class,
new MockDAOInterface() );
So if you're using a dependency inject framework like above, this dovetails nicely. You don't normally have the dependency injection working during test, since it usually requires booting a large chunk of code with a lot of configuration.
By adding a single private constructor, you avoid breaking encapsulation, but you can still inject your mock object into the code during test with a test framework like PowerMock. This is considered best practice.
You could break encapsulation and add publicly accessible methods or ctors to the SeviceClass, but if you don't need them for your design it's not good practice to add them only for test. That's why people put such effort into bypassing encapsulation in frameworks like Mockito and PowerMock. It's not just a dodge around private code, it's because you want to keep the encapsulation while still being able to test.
EDIT:
If you're not familiar with making mock objects, you should do some Google searches on the subject. It's very common and a good skill to have. With the above code, you could make your own mock object. But making mocks is so common that most test frameworks will do this for you.
For example, in PowerMock, I just looked at their page on making mocks here. You can make a mock like this
DAOInteface myMock = createMock(DAOInterface.class);
You can then ask the mock to verify that methods are called:
expect(myMock.someMethod());
Now the mock 'expects' that method to be called, and if it isn't, it'll generate an error for your test. Pretty sweet actually.
You can also return values from a call:
expect(myMock.insert()).andReturn("Test succeeded");
so your code would then see the value "Test succeeded" when it called that method. I don't see that 'insert' does return a value, that's just an example.

Can we mock a method in service while testing the service itself?

I am working on a project where I am using MyBatis annotations as persistence framework. Therefore, I have to create an interface for the 'mapper' and compose the mapper in the service like :
class XYZServiceImpl{
public XYZMapper getXYZMapper(){
return SessionUtil.getSqlSession().getMapper(XYZMapper.class)
}
}
Now while unit testing the service with Mockito, I am trying to inject a mock for the mapper. But since I am injecting mock in an instance of XYZService, how can mock a method of the service itself, in this case getXYZMapper() is what I am trying to stub. Although I have got a solution of creating the instance XYZMapper in the service and not call on demand like the above code does something like :
Class XYZServiceImpl{
XYZMapper mapper;
public void useXYZMapper(){
mapper = SessionUtil.getSqlSession().getMapper(XYZMapper.class);
}
}
But that would bring a lot of code changes (ofcourse I can refactor) but is there a way to achieve without having to make code changes?
Also what would be a 'purist' way to have a mapper instance in the class is it the method 1 that is better than method 2 in terms of performance?
EDIT : Here XYZMapper is an interface. Something like :
public interface XYZMapper{
#Select("SELECT * FROM someclass WHERE id = #{id}")
public SomeClass getSomeClass(int id);
}
EDIT : I am facing a similar situation but with a variance that I have a service that I do want to test like XYZServiceImpl. Now it has a method getXYZDetails() which has a lot of business logic handled within the service. Now if getXYZDetails looks like the following :
public XYZDetails getXYZDetails(int id){
XYZDetails details = new XYZDetails();
details.set1Details(fetchSet1Details(id));
//Perform some business logic
details.set2Details(fetchSet2Details(id));
if(details.set2Details() != null){
for(int i = 0; i < details.set2Details().size(); i++){
flushTheseDetails(i);
}
}
.
.
}
Kindly notice that fetchSet1Details(), fetchSet2Details(), flushTheseDetails are public service, public and private service respectively.
I want to know of a method that can mock/stub these methods while testing getXYZDetails() thus enabling me to

There are several options you can use.
Inject dependency
This works only for simple methods like getXYZMapper when method only returns external dependency of you object. This may require to create new XYZServiceImpl instances if for example mapper is bound to connection which is opened per request.
Encapsulate method behavior in object
Another way to achieve similar result is to use a factory or service locator
like this:
public class XYZServiceImpl {
public XYZServiceImpl(XYZMapperFactory mapperFactory) {
this.mapperFactory = mapperFactory;
}
public XYZMapper getXYZMapper() {
return mapperFactory.getMapper();
}
}
This will allow you easily substitute factory in test with implementation which returns mock mapper.
The similar approach can be used for other methods fetchSet1Details, fetchSet2Details, flushTheseDetails that is moving them to other class or classes. If the method contains complex (and may be loosely related) logic it is a good candidate to be moved in separate class. Think about what these methods do. Usually you can move some essential and unrelated part of them to other class or classes and this makes mocking them much easier.
Subclass
This is not recommended but in legacy code sometimes is very helpful as a temporary solution.
In your test subclass you class under test and override methods you need:
#Test
public void someTest() {
XYZServiceImpl sut = new XYZServiceImpl() {
public XYZMapper getXYZMapper() {
return mapperMock;
}
public Whatever fetchSet1Details() {
return whateverYouNeedInTest;
}
}
sut.invokeMethodUnderTest();
}
The only thing you may need to do is to change access modifier of private method to package-private or protected so you can override them.
Spying
This method in also discouraged but you can use mockito spies:
XYZServiceImpl realService = new XYZServiceImpl();
XYZServiceImpl spy = Mockito.spy(realService);
when(spy.fetchSet1Details()).thenReturn(whaeveryouneed);
when(spy.getXYZMapper()).thenReturn(mockMapper);
spy.methodUnderTest();

I would suggest the "purist" way of doing this is to accept an XYZMapper instance in your constructor and store it in a local field.
In production use, you can pass an e.g. SQLXYZMapper, which will interact with your database. In test use, you can pass in a mocked object that you can verify interactions with.

Domain Event pattern implementation in Java?

I'm searching for a simple Java implementation of Udi Dahan's
Domain Events pattern and infrastructure as detailed in this article.
It's pretty simple and I've implemented my own interpretation, however I'm a Java novice and don't want to be bitten by any mistakes due to inexperience with the language.
The only Java implementation I've found is in the Jdon Framework, but it's a little too heavyweight for my current in my project.
Thanks!

I have been looking for a solution to the same problem in Java EE for a while now. I looked at Axon and jdon (the page doesn't really bode well either :)). Both involve Event Sourcing which I could not "sell" to my employers/customers. I wanted to have Domain Events though since I very much got used to them in .NET/C# projects. So I came up with the following...
I used a similar static DomainEvents object to give me access to a publishing mechanism without the actual implementation details leaking all over my domain model entities. So the calls something like this:
DomainEvents.fire(new MySampleEvent(...some params...));
A pattern and mechanism that is available in CDI spec are the Events with #Observes that allow you to respond to certain events in normal beans with all the service available. That is similar to what I was used to when using DI frameworks like Castle Windsor where I could register generic handlers by interface. So I've got the observers (handlers, listeners, whatever you want to call them) covered. Example:
#Stateless
public class MySampleEventObserver {
public void listen(#Observes MySampleEvent event) {
...
doSomethingWithEvent();
}
}
Now for the publishing (firing in CDI) part. Since there is no way to access CDI in entities (with good reason!) I resolved to using JNDI and BeanManager. I used JNDI to get the BeanManager and use it's fireEvent method. To put bean manager resolving (as seen here) in code:
public class BeanHelper {
public static BeanManager getBeanManager() {
try {
InitialContext initialContext = new InitialContext();
return (BeanManager) initialContext.lookup("java:comp/BeanManager");
} catch (NamingException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
return null;
}
}
}
The final step is the DomainEvents object itself:
public class DomainEvents {
private static boolean mNopMode = false;
public static void setNopMode() {
mNopMode = true;
}
public static void reset() {
mNopMode = false;
}
public static <TDomainEvent> void fire(TDomainEvent event) {
if (mNopMode) {
return;
}
BeanManager manager = BeanHelper.getBeanManager();
manager.fireEvent(event);
}
}
The setNopMode and reset parts are there for testing purposes when there is no context. Manual mocking basically. Set it into NOP operation mode before unit tests and reset after them.
Works fine as a POC. Don't know if there are any serious limitations to it's use though. I leave async bus interactions and similar to the listeners implementation.
Would love any comments.

I'm currently looking at using Googles Guava EventBus to do something similar to the "Salvation" article you reference.
Using it similar to the "How to raise domain events" would look something like this, almost exactly the same as the article:
public class Customer
{
public void DoSomething()
{
MyEventBus.post(new CustomerBecamePreferred() { Customer = this });
}
}
I don't know whether or not you'd consider this as an "implementation of Udi Dahan's Domain Events pattern".
It doesn't require implementing any interfaces; event handlers are marked with annotations and the class is registered with the EventBus with MyEventBus.register(aListenerObject)

Modify a method using Annotations

How can I change what a method is doing in Java ?
I mean, I am trying to use annotations to make the following code
#Anno1(Argument = "Option1")
public class TestClass
{
#Anno2
public void test()
{
}
}
Into
public class TestClass
{
private static StaticReference z;
public void test()
{
z.invokeToAll();
}
}
This is a very simplified example of what I am trying to do. Anno1 will have many possible combinations, but this is not my problem so far. My problem is how to add code to method test()
I am looking for a more generic solution if possible. Eg. A way to add every kind of code in the method (not just a way to .invokeToAll())
So far I am using import javax.annotation.processing.*; and I have the following code, but I don't know how to go on from there
private void processMethodAnnotations(RoundEnvironment env)
{
for (Element e : env.getElementsAnnotatedWith(Anno2.class))
{
//If it is a valid annotation over a method
if (e.getKind() == ElementKind.METHOD)
{
//What to do here :S
}else
{
processingEnv.getMessager().printMessage(Diagnostic.Kind.WARNING,"Not a method!", e);
}
}
}
I have found something about Java Reflection but I have not found any source to help me with what I am doing.
Obviously I extends AbstractProcessor in my code
I have found this tutorial (http://www.zdnetasia.com/writing-and-processing-custom-annotations-part-3-39362483.htm) But this concerns creating a new class, not just changing a method. and the javax.lang.model.elements do not provide any way of editing that element (which in my case represents a Method).
I hope my question is clear and inline with the rules. If not please comment and I will clarify. Thanks.

Annotation processing is the wrong way to go for you, from Wikipedia:
When Java source code is compiled,
annotations can be processed by
compiler plug-ins called annotation
processors. Processors can produce
informational messages or create
additional Java source files or
resources, which in turn may be
compiled and processed, but annotation
processors cannot modify the annotated
code itself.
People suggested to you the right way - AOP. Specifically, you can use AspectJ. "Quick result" way is (if you use Eclipse):
Install AJDT (AspectJ Development Tools)
Create an AspectJ project and add there your classes and annotations
Create Aspect:
public aspect Processor {
private StaticReference z;
pointcut generic()
// intercept execution of method named test, annotated with #Anno1
// from any class type, annotated with #Anno2
: execution(#Anno2 * (#Anno1 *).test())
// method takes no arguments
&& args ();
// here you have written what you want the method to actually do
void around () : generic() {
z.invokeToAll();
}
}
now you can execute a test and you will see that it works ;) AJDT compiles code for you automatically, so do not need any manual work to do, hope that's what you called "magic" ;)
UPDATE:
if your code in the test() method depends on the Anno1 annotation value, then inside aspect you can get class annotation for which it is executed this way:
void around () : generic() {
Annotation[] classAnnotations = thisJoinPoint.getThis().getClass().getAnnotations();
String ArgumentValue = null;
for ( Annotation annotation : classAnnotations ) {
if ( annotation instanceof Anno1 ) {
ArgumentValue = ((Anno1) annotation).Argument();
break;
}
}
if ( ArgumentValue != null && ArgumentValue.equals("Option1")) {
z.invokeToAll();
}
}
where thisJoinPoint is a special reference variable.
UPDATE2:
if you want to add System.out.println( this ) in your aspect, you need to write there System.out.println( thisJoinPoint.getThis() ), just tested and it works. thisJoinPoint.getThis() returns you "this" but not exactly; in fact this is Object variable and if you want to get any propery you need either to cast or to use reflection. And thisJoinPoint.getThis() does not provide access to private properties.
Well, now seems that your question is answered, but if I missed anything, or you get additional question/problems with this way - feel free to ask ;)

It's perfectly possible to do what you ask, although there is a caveat: relying on private compiler APIs. Sounds scary, but it isn't really (compiler implementations tend to be stable).
There's a paper that explains the procedure: The Hacker's Guide to Javac.
Notably, this is used by Project Lombok to provide automatic getter/setter generation (amongst other things). The following article explains how it does it, basically re-iterating what is said the aforementioned paper.

Well, you might see if the following boilerplate code will be useful:
public void magic(Object bean, String[] args) throws Exception {
for (Method method : bean.getClass().getDeclaredMethods()) {
if (method.isAnnotationPresent(Anno2.class)) {
// Invoke the original method
method.invoke(bean, args);
// Invoke your 'z' method
StaticReference.invokeAll();
}
}
}
As an alternative your might employ aspect oriented programming, for instance you have the AspectJ project.

I'm not sure at all if it is even possible to change the source or byte code via annotations. From what your describing it looks as if aspect oriented programming could provide a solution to your problem.
Your annotations are pretty similiar to the pointcut concept (they mark a location where code needs to be inserted) and the inserted code is close the advice concept.
Another approach would be parsing the java source file into an abstract syntax tree, modify this AST and serialize to a java compiler input.

If your class extends a suitable interface, you could wrap it in a DynamicProxy, which delegates all calls to the original methods, except the call to test.

mock https request in java

Let's say I'm writing an application and I need to be able to do something like this:
String url = "https://someurl/";
GetMethod method = new GetMethod(URLEncoder.encode(url));
String content = method.getResponseBodyAsString();
Is there a way to provide a mock server that would let me handle the https request? What I'm looking for is a way to write unit tests, but I need to be able to mock the part that actually goes out to https://someurl so I can get a known response back.

Take a look at jadler (http://jadler.net), an http stubbing/mocking library I've been working on for some time. The 1.0.0 stable version has been just released, it should provide the capabilities you requested:
#Test
public void getAccount() {
onRequest()
.havingMethodEqualTo("GET")
.havingURIEqualTo("/accounts/1")
.havingBody(isEmptyOrNullString())
.havingHeaderEqualTo("Accept", "application/json")
.respond()
.withTimeout(2, SECONDS)
.withStatus(200)
.withBody("{\"account\":{\"id\" : 1}}")
.withEncoding(Charset.forName("UTF-8"))
.withContentType("application/json; charset=UTF-8");
final AccountService service = new AccountServiceRestImpl("http", "localhost", port());
final Account account = service.getAccount(1);
assertThat(account, is(notNullValue()));
assertThat(account.getId(), is(1));
}
#Test
public void deleteAccount() {
onRequest()
.havingMethodEqualTo("DELETE")
.havingPathEqualTo("/accounts/1")
.respond()
.withStatus(204);
final AccountService service = new AccountServiceRestImpl("http", "localhost", port());
service.deleteAccount(1);
verifyThatRequest()
.havingMethodEqualTo("DELETE")
.havingPathEqualTo("/accounts/1")
.receivedOnce();
}

You essentially have two options:
1. Abstract the call to the framework and test this.
E.g. refactor the code to allow you to inject a mock implementation at some point. There are many ways to do this. e.g. create a getUrlAsString() and mock that. (also suggested above). Or create a url getter factory that returns a GetMethod object. The factory then can be mocked.
2. Start up a app server as part of the test and then run your method against it. (This will be more of an integration test)
This can be achieved in an number of ways. This can be external to the test e.g. the maven jetty plugin. or the test can programmatically start up the server. see: http://docs.codehaus.org/display/JETTY/Embedding+Jetty
Running it over https will complicate this but it will still be possible with self signed certs. But I'd ask yourself - what exactly you want to test? I doubt you actually need to test https functionality, its a proven technology.
Personally I'd go for option 1 - you are attempting to test functionality of an external library. That is usually unnecessary. Also it's good practice to abstract out your dependencies to external libraries.
Hope this helps.

If you are writing a unit test, you dont want any external dependencies. from the api,
GetMethod
extends
HttpMethod
so you can easily mock it with your favorite mocking library. Your
method.getResponseBodyAsString()
call can be mocked to return any data you want.

You can wrap that code in some class and have WebClient.getUrl() and then mock (e.g. jmock) that method to return stored files - say
expectation {
oneOf("https://someurl/"), will(returnValue(someHTML));
}

Take a look at JWebUnit http://jwebunit.sourceforge.net/
Here is an example of a test...Its really quite intuitive.
public class ExampleWebTestCase extends WebTestCase {
public void setUp() {
super.setUp();
setBaseUrl("http://localhost:8080/test");
}
public void test1() {
beginAt("/home");
clickLink("login");
assertTitleEquals("Login");
setTextField("username", "test");
setTextField("password", "test123");
submit();
assertTitleEquals("Welcome, test!");
}
}

You could always launch a thttpd server as part of your unit test to serve the requests locally. Though, ideally, you have a well tested GetMethod, and then you can just mock it, and not have to actually have a remote server around for ALL of your tests.
Resources
thttpd: http://www.acme.com/software/thttpd/

To what extend are you interested in mocking this "Get" call, because if you are looking for a general purpose mocking framework for Java which integrates well with JUnit and allows to setup expectations which are automatically asserted when incorporated into a JUnit suite, then you really ought to take a look at jMock.
Now without more code, it's hard to determine whether this is actually what you are looking for, but a (somewhat useless) example, of something similar to the example code you wrote, would go something like this:
class GetMethodTest {
#Rule public JUnitRuleMockery context = new JunitRuleMockery();
#Test
public void testGetMethod() throws Exception {
// Setup mocked object with expectations
final GetMethod method = context.mock(GetMethod.class);
context.checking(new Expectations() {{
oneOf (method).getResponseBodyAsString();
will(returnValue("Response text goes here"));
}});
// Now do the checking against mocked object
String content = method.getResponseBodyAsString();
}
}

Use xml mimic stub server, that can simulate static http response based on request parameters, headers, etc. It is very simple to configure and use it.
http://xmlmimic.sourceforge.net/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/xmlmimic/