I've got such block in my method
#Override
protected void executeInternal(JobExecutionContext context) throws JobExecutionException {
if (null != processor) {
processor.process();
} else {
LOGGER.warn("Job was not initialized correctly.");
}
}
To cover processor.process() I wrote this test
#Test
public void testExecuteInternal() throws JobExecutionException {
JobExecutionContext context = createMock(JobExecutionContext.class);
processor.process();
expectLastCall();
replay(processor);
job.executeInternal(context);
verify(processor);
}
But how to cover block where process is not executed?
Since you are using a setter method to set the processor for executeInternal, to test the block where process is not executed, in your test case, use the setter to set processor to null.
So instead of processor = EasyMock.createMock(Processor.class)
You will have for this test processor = null
That should do the trick.
Related
I'm not expert at unit test but trying to write unit test for :
#KafkaListener(id = "group_id", topics = "topic" )
public AvroObject listen(AvroObject test, Acknowledgment ack)
But no idea how I can make it when there is and interface as an argument. I try this but not sure is it something useful or not make sense as an test :
#InjectMocks
KafkaConsumer kafkaConsumerTest;
#Test
#DisplayName("Assert Valid Consume")
void consumeValidEvent() throws URISyntaxException, IOException, InterruptedException {
// given
AvroObject event = createEvent(); //Create sample object as AvroObject
// when
AvroObject response = kafkaConsumerTest.listen(event, new Acknowledgment() {
#Override
public void acknowledge() {
}
#Override
public void nack(long sleep) {
//do nothing
}
// then
assertNotNull(response);
assertEquals(response.getCode1() ,98765);
assertEquals(response.getCode2() ,123456);
}
I was wondering if you can give me the best approach for this situation! cheers
class A {
public static int f1() {
return 1;
}
public static int f2() {
return A.f1();
}
}
class ATest {
#Test
void testF2() {
try (MockedStatic<A> aStatic = Mockito.mockStatic(A.class)) {
aStatic.when(A::f1).thenReturn(2);
int ret = A.f2(); // getting 0 here
assertEquals(ret, 2);
} catch(Exception e) {
}
}
}
In the testF2 I want to test static function A::f2().
And it internally calls another static function A::f1().
I did stub A::f1() to return 2 using "MockedStatic" and "when" way.
But it's not working, it's returning 0.
How to solve it?
I think you miss to specify a mock behavior:
class ATest {
#Test
void testF2() {
try (MockedStatic<A> aStatic = Mockito.mockStatic(A.class)) {
aStatic.when(A::f1).thenReturn(2);
aStatic.when(A::f2).thenReturn(A.f1()); // <- added this
int ret = A.f2(); // getting 0 here
Assertions.assertEquals(ret, 2);
} catch (Exception e) {
}
}
}
by telling the mock what to do when A.f2() is invoked, test runs fine.
Update:
Mocks do what you tell them, if you don't tell what to do when a method is invoked they do nothing, that's why you have to mock f2 too.
You want to test A, then mock it is not your friend. I normally use a Mockito.spy() to partially mock my subject under test .You want to mock f1 but test f2, I don't think spy applies here because there is no instance to spy..
I suggest you to rearrange A avoiding static methods if possible or using parameters you can mock.
When you mock a class with static methods, all static methods are mocked. If you only want to mock the behavior of only 1 method, you have to add Mockito.CALLS_REAL_METHODS argument to Mockito.mockStatic() as you can see in the following example.
#Test
void testF2() {
try (MockedStatic<A> aStatic = Mockito.mockStatic(A.class, Mockito.CALLS_REAL_METHODS)) {
aStatic.when(A::f1).thenReturn(2);
int ret = A.f2(); // getting 2 here
Assert.assertEquals(2, ret); // (expected, result)
} catch(Exception e) {
}
}
This way only the f1 method invocation is mocked but f2 invocation calls the real code.
I am trying to write a Junit for a piece of code for asserting the value as null. But the value is changing on the actual call.
Main Class Code
#Activate
public void activate(ComponentContext context)
{
myNotificationSubscriber = NotificationSubscriber.newInstance(myGlobalTableNotificationService,
NotificationType.ENTITIES,
this);
setWantedSubscriptionStatus();
LOG.debug("Activating {} service", getClass().getName());
try
{
applyConfigUpdate(context, IS_ACTIVATION);
}
catch (ServiceNotAvailableException e)
{
String instanceNameWithException = COUNTER_INSTANCE_COBA.concat("-")
.concat(String.valueOf(e.getResponseCode().getResponseCode()))
.concat(e.getClass().getSimpleName());
myCounterregistrator.get()
.incrementCounter(Counter.DATAACCESS_COBA_RESPONSE_UNSUCCESSFUL.getCounterInstance(instanceNameWithException));
LOG.debug("Can not activate Component :{}", e.getMessage());
}
LOG.info("COBA Cache state is {}", myCacheState);
}
private GlobalTableRetriever getGlobalTableRetrieverer() throws ServiceNotAvailableException
{
GlobalTableRetriever tableFetcher = myGlobalTableRetriever.get();
if (tableFetcher == null)
{
throw new ServiceNotAvailableException(RETRIEVER_SERVICE_NOT_AVAILABLE_MSG, ResponseCode.COBA_READ_DATA_TEMPORARY_ERROR);
}
return tableFetcher;
}
I want to write the test for the catch block. So tried to write the test case in below.
#Test
public void testapplyConfigUpdate() throws GlobalTableException
{
exception.expect(ServiceNotAvailableException.class);
globalTableRetriever.set(null);
tableFetcher = globalTableRetriever.get();
assertThat(tableFetcher).isNull();
myTableHandler.activate(myOsgiComponentContext);
verify(myCounterRegistratorService, times(1)).incrementCounter(any(CounterInstance.class));
}
But once its entering to getGlobalTableRetrieverer method, the assertion null value is changing to original.
Why do you even need to assert that?
exception.expect(ServiceNotAvailableException.class);
already implies that tableFetcher is null.
Just try this :
#Test
public void testapplyConfigUpdate() throws GlobalTableException
{
exception.expect(ServiceNotAvailableException.class);
globalTableRetriever.set(null);
tableFetcher = globalTableRetriever.get();
}
I have the following code in my performFinish() method of my Wizard Class :
public boolean performFinish() {
try {
getContainer().run(true, false, changeArtifactRunnable());
}
catch (InvocationTargetException | InterruptedException e) {
LoggerClass.logException(e);
}
I want to test Exception for InvocationTargetException and InterruptedException using Mockito.
In the above code, getContainer() method is from org.eclipse.jface.wizard.Wizard class and
public void run(boolean fork, boolean cancelable,
IRunnableWithProgress runnable) throws InvocationTargetException,
InterruptedException;
method is from org.eclipse.jface.operation.IRunnableContext class.
How do I test both the exceptions in performFinish() method?
You can use the expected keyword in order to do so. For example:
#Test(expected = InvocationTargetException.class)
public void testInvocationTargetException() {
\\Invoke the method to be tested under the conditions, such that InvocationTargetException is thrown by it. No need of any assert statements
}
===========================================================================
Edit:
#RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class)
public class EditArtifactWizardTest {
#Spy
//use correct constructor of EditArtifactWizard
private EditArtifactWizard editArtifactWizardSpy=Mockito.spy(new EditArtifactWizard ());
#Test(expected = InvocationTargetException.class)
public void testInvocationTargetException() {
\\Invoke the method to be tested under the conditions, such that InvocationTargetException is thrown by it. No need of any assert statements
Mockito.when(editArtifactWizardSpy.getContainer()).thenThrow(InvocationTargetException.class);
editArtifactWizardSpy.performFinish();
}
}
You can create the Spy of EditArtifactWizard class and mock the behavior of the getContainerMethod.
P.S: Please excuse for typos or compilation error as I am not using any editor.
I'm pretty new to programming with java but I've tried to directly start with unit-testing and therefore also used JMock. I have already implemented some test-cases (with JMock) that work, but this one I just can't get to run.
What I did:
I wrote a test-class which creates a mock object and then I'm expectation one (using oneOf) invocation. After running the unit test it says it fails (but the logs say otherwise, as i print out the data I returned at the invocation using will(returnValue(x)).
The next funny/weird thing is - if I change the oneOf to "never" the unit test succeeds, but it throws an Exception:
Exception in thread "Thread-2" java.lang.AssertionError: unexpected invocation: blockingQueue.take()
expectations:
expected never, never invoked: blockingQueue.take(); returns
what happened before this: nothing!
Here the code:
#RunWith(JMock.class)
public class ExecuteGameRunnableTest {
private Mockery context = new JUnit4Mockery();
private Thread testObject;
private BlockingQueue<Game> queueMock;
private Executor executorMock;
#SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
#Before
public void setUp() {
queueMock = context.mock(BlockingQueue.class);
executorMock = context.mock(Executor.class);
testObject = new Thread(new ExecuteGameRunnable(queueMock, executorMock, true));
}
#After
public void tearDown() {
queueMock = null;
executorMock = null;
testObject = null;
}
#Test
public void testQueueTake() throws InterruptedException {
final Game game = new Game();
game.setId(1);
game.setProcessing(false);
context.checking(new Expectations() {{
never(queueMock).take(); will(returnValue(game));
}});
testObject.start();
context.assertIsSatisfied();
}
}
and the runnable that I'm testing:
public class ExecuteGameRunnable implements Runnable {
private BlockingQueue<Game> queue;
private Executor executor;
private Boolean unitTesting = false;
static Logger logger = Logger.getLogger(ExecuteGameRunnable.class);
public ExecuteGameRunnable(BlockingQueue<Game> queue, Executor executor) {
this.queue = queue;
this.executor = executor;
}
public ExecuteGameRunnable (BlockingQueue<Game> queue, Executor executor, Boolean unitTesting) {
this(queue,executor);
this.unitTesting = unitTesting;
}
public void run() {
try {
do {
if (Thread.interrupted()) throw new InterruptedException();
Game game = queue.take();
logger.info("Game "+game.getId()+" taken. Checking if it is processing"); // THIS ONE PRINTS OUT THE GAME ID THAT I RETURN WITH JMOCK-FRAMEWORK
if (game.isProcessing()) {
continue;
}
game.updateProcessing(true);
executor.execute(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
// TODO Auto-generated method stub
}
});
} while (!unitTesting);
} catch (InterruptedException ex) {
logger.info("Game-Execution-Executor interrupted.");
return;
} catch (DataSourceException ex) {
logger.fatal("Unable to connect to DB whilst executing game: "+id_game,ex);
return;
}
}
}
JMock isn't thread safe. It's intended to support unit testing, rather than what is a very small integration test. Frankly, in this case I'd use a real BlockingQueue rather than a mock one. And there is no way you should have a unitTesting flag in your production code.
One more thing, you don't need to set the fields in the test class to null, jUnit flushes the instance for every test.