We Keep Coding

How to mock System.exit with PowerMockito?

I want to unit test Java code that calls System.exit(-1) and want it to just do nothing instead of exiting the process. The underlying reason is that otherwise JaCoCo does not work properly and project guidelines want to see that line covered. Changing the tested code is not an option, too. Other calls to System should work normally. PowerMockito 2.0.7 is already used in the project and should be used here, too. My current Java version is 1.8.0_181 on Windows.
I tried with
PowerMockito.spy(System.class);
PowerMockito.doNothing().when(System.class, "exit", ArgumentMatchers.any(int.class));
//here comes the code under test that calls System.exit
It does not seem to work, System.exit seems to exit the process anyway.
How do it get this to work?

I think you should replace both the lines in your sample code
PowerMockito.spy(System.class);
PowerMockito.doNothing.....
to
PowerMockito.mockStatic(System.class);
This change works in my local as System.exit does nothing because of the mock on static method.
Also, I hope you are using PrepareForTest annotation
#PrepareForTest(CLASS_UNDER_TEST)
The spy method is to call real methods and have some wrapper around the non-static methods. Since you need a mock for static methods, mockStatic method should be used instead.
Update 1
The PowerMockito mockStatic method by default creates mock for all the static methods within the class. I don't have any clean solution. But, I can suggest a solution which looks ugly but does what is needed i.e only mock specific static method and remaining methods are invoking real methods. PoweMockito's mockStatic method is internally calling DefaultMockCreator to mock the static methods.
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
public class StaticTest {
#Test
public void testMethod() throws Exception {
// Get static methods for which mock is needed
Method exitMethod = System.class.getMethod("exit", int.class);
Method[] methodsToMock = new Method[] {exitMethod};
// Create mock for only those static methods
DefaultMockCreator.mock(System.class, true, false, null, null, methodsToMock);
System.exit(-1); // This will be mocked
System.out.println(System.currentTimeMillis()); // This will call up real methods
}
}
As per the PowerMockito documentation, the right way to call static void method is -
PowerMockito.mockStatic(SomeClass.class);
PowerMockito.doNothing().when(SomeClass.class);
SomeClass.someVoidMethod();
Reference - https://github.com/powermock/powermock/wiki/Mockito#how-to-stub-void-static-method-to-throw-exception
This should create the mock behaviour for the specific static void method. Unfortunately, this doesn't work for System Class because System class is final. Had it been not final, this would have worked. I tried it and I got this exception -
org.mockito.exceptions.base.MockitoException:
Cannot mock/spy class java.lang.System
Mockito cannot mock/spy because :
- final class
Code -
#Test
public void testMethod() throws Exception {
PowerMockito.mockStatic(System.class);
PowerMockito.doNothing().when(System.class);
System.exit(-1); // mockito error coming here
System.exit(-1);
System.currentTimeMillis();
}

Mocking Static method using PowerMockito

I am using PowerMockito to mock a static method to get a better line coverage. The test passes but Cobertura still shows the return line as red. I am not sure if I am using PowerMockito in a wrong way. Any clues?
MUT
public static Object getBean( String beanName ) {
return AppContext.getApplicationContext().getBean( beanName );
}
Junit test
#RunWith ( PowerMockRunner.class )
#PrepareForTest ( {AppContext.class} )
private ApplicationContext applicationContext;
#Test
public void testGetBean() throws Exception {
String beanName = "junitBean";
applicationContext = Mockito.mock(ApplicationContext.class);
PowerMockito.mockStatic(AppContext.class);
AppContext.setApplicationContext(applicationContext);
PowerMockito.when(AppContext.getApplicationContext()).thenReturn(applicationContext);
PowerMockito.when(AppContext.getApplicationContext().getBean(beanName)).thenReturn(Object.class);
AppContext.getBean(beanName);
}

To mock static methods, PowerMock has to modify the Java Byte Code of your class after it has been compiled. Code coverage tools work in the same way - they "instrument" (google for "bytecode instrumentation") the bytecode in order to collect information about which lines of code have been run.
Given that there are two things here modifying already compiled code according to their own needs, it's not surprising that they don't work well together. In fact, other coverage tools have the same issue e.g. this issue on the PowerMock GitHub page.
It is precisely reasons like this that mocking static methods is a bad idea and should only really be done in very exceptional circumstances. In most cases, you can either wrap the static method call in an interface and pass an instance of the interface to your object under test, or better yet (if the code is under your control) remove the static method and replace it with an instance method.
You could also just pass the ApplicationContext instance directly into the constructor of your class under test.

Non static #BeforeClass equivalent when Spring unit test runner? [duplicate]

Are there any best practices to get Junit execute a function once in a test file , and it should also not be static.
like #BeforeClass on non static function?
Here is an ugly solution :
#Before void init(){
if (init.get() == false){
init.set(true);
// do once block
}
}
well this is something i dont want to do , and i am looking for an integrated junit solution.

A simple if statement seems to work pretty well too:
#RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
#ContextConfiguration(locations = {"classpath:test-context.xml"})
public class myTest {
public static boolean dbInit = false;
#Autowired
DbUtils dbUtils;
#Before
public void setUp(){
if(!dbInit){
dbUtils.dropTables();
dbUtils.createTables();
dbInit = true;
}
}
...

To use an empty constructor is the easiest solution. You can still override the constructor in the extended class.
But it's not optimal with all the inheritance. That's why JUnit 4 uses annotations instead.
Another option is to create a helper method in a factory/util class and let that method do the work.
If you're using Spring, you should consider using the #TestExecutionListeners annotation.
Something like this test:
#RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
#TestExecutionListeners({CustomTestExecutionListener.class,
DependencyInjectionTestExecutionListener.class})
#ContextConfiguration("test-config.xml")
public class DemoTest {
Spring's AbstractTestExecutionListener contains for example this empty method that you can override:
public void beforeTestClass(TestContext testContext) throws Exception {
/* no-op */
}
NOTE: DO NOT overlook/miss DependencyInjectionTestExecutionListener while adding custom TestExecutionListeners. If you do, all the autowires will be null.

If you don't want to set up static initializers for one time initialization and are not particular about using JUnit, take a look at TestNG. TestNG supports non-static, one-time initialization with a variety of configuration options, all using annotations.
In TestNG, this would be equivalent to:
#org.testng.annotations.BeforeClass
public void setUpOnce() {
// One time initialization.
}
For teardown,
#org.testng.annotations.AfterClass
public void tearDownOnce() {
// One time tear down.
}
For the TestNG equivalent of JUnit 4's #Before and #After, you can use #BeforeMethod and #AfterMethod respectively.

Easily use #BeforeAllMethods/#AfterAllMethods annotations to run a method inside the instance context (non-static), where all injected values will be available.
There is a special testing library for this:
https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.bitbucket.radistao.test/before-after-spring-test-runner/0.1.0
https://bitbucket.org/radistao/before-after-spring-test-runner/
The only limitation: works only for Spring testing.
(I'm the developer of this testing library)

I've never tried but maybe you can create a no-argument constructor and call you function from there?

The article discuss 2 very nice solutions for this problem:
"clean" junit with custom Runner (using interface but you could extend it with a custom annotation e.g. #BeforeInstance)
Spring execution listeners as mentioned by Espen before.

UPDATE: Please see the comment by Cherry for why the suggestion below is flawed. (Am keeping the answer on here rather than deleting as the comment may provide useful information to others as to why this doesn't work.)
Another option worth considering if using dependency injection (e.g. Spring) is #PostConstruct. This will guarantee dependency injection is complete, which wouldn't be the case in a constructor:
#PostConstruct
public void init() {
// One-time initialization...
}

Just use #BeforeClass:
#BeforeClass
public static void init() {
}
It doesn't make sense for init to be non-static because each test is run in a separate instance. The instance
that init is run on would not match the instance of any test.
The only reason that you might want it to be non-static is to override it in subclasses, but you can do this
with static methods too. Just use the same name, and only the subclass init method will be called.

Declaring Jmockit mock parameters on #BeforeMethod of TestNG

I've been testing my code behavior using TestNG and JMockit for a while now and I have had no specific issue with their combination. Today I came across a situation where I needed to mock one of my internal dependencies, in the so called, type wide manner and I did not need to keep that mock around since none of the test cases dealt with it directly while they counted on the mocked version functionality. So, naturally, I put the mocking logic in my #BeforeMethod. Here is a sample:
public class SampleTest
{
#Mocked
#Cascading
private InnerDependency dependency;
#BeforeMethod
public void beforeMethod()
{
new NonStrictExpectations()
{
{
dependency.getOutputStream((String)any);
result = new Delegate<OutputStream>()
{
public OutputStream getOutputStream(String url)
{
return null;
}
};
}
};
}
#Test
public void testNormalOperation()
{
// The test whose desired behavior depends on dependency being mocked out
// ..
}
}
But, since my tests do not care about the mocked dependency explicitly, I'm not willing to declare it as a test class field, unlike what is done above. To my knowledge of JMockit The only options remaining would be:
Declare dependency as a local mock field:
new NonStrictExpectations()
{
#Cascading
private InnerDependency dependency;
{
//...
}
}
Declare dependency as an input argument for beforeMethod(), similar to what is done for normal #Test methods:
#BeforeMethod
public void beforeMethod(#Mocked #Cascading final InnerDependency dependency)
{
// ...
}
I see that JMockit 1.6+ would not like the first option and warns with WARNING: Local mock field "dependency" should be moved to the test class or converted to a parameter of the test method. Hence, to keep everyone happy, I'm ruling this option out.
But for the second option, TestNG (currently 6.8.6) throws exception when running the test saying java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: wrong number of arguments. I don't see this behavior with normal #Test cases passed with #Mocked parameters. Even playing with #Parameter and #Optional will not help (and should not have!).
So, is there any way I could make this work without declaring the unneccessary test class mock field, or am I missing something here?
Thanks

Only test methods (annotated with #Test in JUnit or TestNG) support mock parameters, so the only choice here is to declare a mock field at the test class level.
Even if not used in any test method, I think it's better than having it declared in a setup method (using #Before, #BeforeMethod, etc.). If it were to be possible, the mock would still have to apply to all tests, because of the nature of setup methods; having a mock field of the test class makes it clear what the scope of the mock is.

Dynamic partial mocking is one more technique to specify #Mocked dependencies locally. However, it has it's limitations (see comments below).

Mock System class to get system properties

I have a folder path set in system variable through JVM arguments in Eclipse and I am trying to access it in my class as:
System.getProperty("my_files_path").
While writing junit test method for this class, I tried mocking this call as test classes do not consider JVM arguments. I have used PowerMockito to mock static System class and tried returning some path when System.getProperpty is being called.
Had #RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class) and #PrepareForTest(System.class) annotations at class level. However, System class is not getting mocked as a result I always get null result.
Any help is appreciated.

Thanks Satish. This works except with a small modification. I wrote PrepareForTest(PathFinder.class), preparing the class I am testing for test cases instead of System.class
Also, as mock works only once, I called my method right after mocking.
My code just for reference:
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest(PathInformation.class)
public class PathInformationTest {
private PathFinder pathFinder = new PathFinder();
#Test
public void testValidHTMLFilePath() {
PowerMockito.mockStatic(System.class);
PowerMockito.when(System.getProperty("my_files_path")).thenReturn("abc");
assertEquals("abc",pathFinder.getHtmlFolderPath());
}
}

There are certain classes PowerMock can't mock in the usual way. See here:
https://code.google.com/p/powermock/wiki/MockSystem
This, however, may still not work. In order of "good design" preference, you can fall back to these:
Refactor your code! Using a System property for passing a file path around is probably not the best way. Why not use a properties file loaded into a Properties object? Why not use getters/setters for the components that need to know this path? There are many better ways to do this.
The only reason I could think of not to do this is you're trying to wrap a test harness around code you "can't" modify.
Use #Before and #After methods to set the System property to some known value for the test(s). You could even make it part of the #Test method itself. This will be FAR easier than attempting to mock through PowerMock. Just call System.setProperty("my_files_path","fake_path");

System class is declared as final and cannot be mocked by libraries such as PowerMock. Several answers posted here are incorrect. If you are using Apache System Utils you can use getEnvironmentVariable method instead of calling System.getenv directly. SystemUtils can be mocked since it is not declared as final.

Set the system property in your test and ensure that it is restored after the test by using the rule RestoreSystemProperties of the library System Rules.
public class PathInformationTest {
private PathFinder pathFinder = new PathFinder();
#Rule
public TestRule restoreSystemProperties = new RestoreSystemProperties();
#Test
public void testValidHTMLFilePath() {
System.setProperty("my_files_path", "abc");
assertEquals("abc",pathFinder.getHtmlFolderPath());
}
}

The System.setter or getter method should be put in a user defined method and that method can be mocked to return the desired property in unit test.
public String getSysEnv(){
return System.getEnv("thisprp");
}

#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest(System.class)
public class MySuperClassTest {
#Test
public void test(){
PowerMockito.mockStatic(System.class);
PowerMockito.when(System.getProperty("java.home")).thenReturn("abc");
System.out.println(System.getProperty("java.home"));
}
}

Sailaja add System.class because as per the power mock guidelines for static,private mocking you should add the class in prepare for test.
#PrepareForTest({PathInformation.class,System.class})
Hope this helps.let me know if it doesn't work