I am trying to assgin a value to a variable in script component using C# but unable to do so. Can anyone please post the code or tell me what wrong below.
public override void PostExecute()
base.PostExecute();
IDTSVariables100 varCollection = null;
this.VariableDispenser.LockForWrite("User::Variable");
this.VariableDispenser.GetVariables(out varCollection);
varCollection["User::Variable"].Value = #"TESTING";
MessageBox.Show(Variables.MerchOrgName.ToString());
This example is very comprehensive. Most of the time the easier of the two methods is sufficient - especially if you are just starting.
http://microsoft-ssis.blogspot.com/2011/01/how-to-use-variables-in-script.html
Related
I'm using Mockito 1.9.0. I want mock the behaviour for a single method of a class in a JUnit test, so I have
final MyClass myClassSpy = Mockito.spy(myInstance);
Mockito.when(myClassSpy.method1()).thenReturn(myResults);
The problem is, in the second line, myClassSpy.method1() is actually getting called, resulting in an exception. The only reason I'm using mocks is so that later, whenever myClassSpy.method1() is called, the real method won't be called and the myResults object will be returned.
MyClass is an interface and myInstance is an implementation of that, if that matters.
What do I need to do to correct this spying behaviour?
Let me quote the official documentation:
Important gotcha on spying real objects!
Sometimes it's impossible to use when(Object) for stubbing spies. Example:
List list = new LinkedList();
List spy = spy(list);
// Impossible: real method is called so spy.get(0) throws IndexOutOfBoundsException (the list is yet empty)
when(spy.get(0)).thenReturn("foo");
// You have to use doReturn() for stubbing
doReturn("foo").when(spy).get(0);
In your case it goes something like:
doReturn(resultsIWant).when(myClassSpy).method1();
In my case, using Mockito 2.0, I had to change all the any() parameters to nullable() in order to stub the real call.
My case was different from the accepted answer. I was trying to mock a package-private method for an instance that did not live in that package
package common;
public class Animal {
void packageProtected();
}
package instances;
class Dog extends Animal { }
and the test classes
package common;
public abstract class AnimalTest<T extends Animal> {
#Before
setup(){
doNothing().when(getInstance()).packageProtected();
}
abstract T getInstance();
}
package instances;
class DogTest extends AnimalTest<Dog> {
Dog getInstance(){
return spy(new Dog());
}
#Test
public void myTest(){}
}
The compilation is correct, but when it tries to setup the test, it invokes the real method instead.
Declaring the method protected or public fixes the issue, tho it's not a clean solution.
The answer by Tomasz Nurkiewicz appears not to tell the whole story!
NB Mockito version: 1.10.19.
I am very much a Mockito newb, so can't explain the following behaviour: if there's an expert out there who can improve this answer, please feel free.
The method in question here, getContentStringValue, is NOT final and NOT static.
This line does call the original method getContentStringValue:
doReturn( "dummy" ).when( im ).getContentStringValue( anyInt(), isA( ScoreDoc.class ));
This line does not call the original method getContentStringValue:
doReturn( "dummy" ).when( im ).getContentStringValue( anyInt(), any( ScoreDoc.class ));
For reasons which I can't answer, using isA() causes the intended (?) "do not call method" behaviour of doReturn to fail.
Let's look at the method signatures involved here: they are both static methods of Matchers. Both are said by the Javadoc to return null, which is a little difficult to get your head around in itself. Presumably the Class object passed as the parameter is examined but the result either never calculated or discarded. Given that null can stand for any class and that you are hoping for the mocked method not to be called, couldn't the signatures of isA( ... ) and any( ... ) just return null rather than a generic parameter* <T>?
Anyway:
public static <T> T isA(java.lang.Class<T> clazz)
public static <T> T any(java.lang.Class<T> clazz)
The API documentation does not give any clue about this. It also seems to say the need for such "do not call method" behaviour is "very rare". Personally I use this technique all the time: typically I find that mocking involves a few lines which "set the scene" ... followed by calling a method which then "plays out" the scene in the mock context which you have staged... and while you are setting up the scenery and the props the last thing you want is for the actors to enter stage left and start acting their hearts out...
But this is way beyond my pay grade... I invite explanations from any passing Mockito high priests...
* is "generic parameter" the right term?
One more possible scenario which may causing issues with spies is when you're testing spring beans (with spring test framework) or some other framework that is proxing your objects during test.
Example
#Autowired
private MonitoringDocumentsRepository repository
void test(){
repository = Mockito.spy(repository)
Mockito.doReturn(docs1, docs2)
.when(repository).findMonitoringDocuments(Mockito.nullable(MonitoringDocumentSearchRequest.class));
}
In above code both Spring and Mockito will try to proxy your MonitoringDocumentsRepository object, but Spring will be first, which will cause real call of findMonitoringDocuments method. If we debug our code just after putting a spy on repository object it will look like this inside debugger:
repository = MonitoringDocumentsRepository$$EnhancerBySpringCGLIB$$MockitoMock$
#SpyBean to the rescue
If instead #Autowired annotation we use #SpyBean annotation, we will solve above problem, the SpyBean annotation will also inject repository object but it will be firstly proxied by Mockito and will look like this inside debugger
repository = MonitoringDocumentsRepository$$MockitoMock$$EnhancerBySpringCGLIB$
and here is the code:
#SpyBean
private MonitoringDocumentsRepository repository
void test(){
Mockito.doReturn(docs1, docs2)
.when(repository).findMonitoringDocuments(Mockito.nullable(MonitoringDocumentSearchRequest.class));
}
Important gotcha on spying real objects
When stubbing a method using spies , please use doReturn() family of methods.
when(Object) would result in calling the actual method that can throw exceptions.
List spy = spy(new LinkedList());
//Incorrect , spy.get() will throw IndexOutOfBoundsException
when(spy.get(0)).thenReturn("foo");
//You have to use doReturn() for stubbing
doReturn("foo").when(spy).get(0);
I've found yet another reason for spy to call the original method.
Someone had the idea to mock a final class, and found about MockMaker:
As this works differently to our current mechanism and this one has different limitations and as we want to gather experience and user feedback, this feature had to be explicitly activated to be available ; it can be done via the mockito extension mechanism by creating the file src/test/resources/mockito-extensions/org.mockito.plugins.MockMaker containing a single line: mock-maker-inline
Source: https://github.com/mockito/mockito/wiki/What%27s-new-in-Mockito-2#mock-the-unmockable-opt-in-mocking-of-final-classesmethods
After I merged and brought that file to my machine, my tests failed.
I just had to remove the line (or the file), and spy() worked.
One way to make sure a method from a class is not called is to override the method with a dummy.
WebFormCreatorActivity activity = spy(new WebFormCreatorActivity(clientFactory) {//spy(new WebFormCreatorActivity(clientFactory));
#Override
public void select(TreeItem i) {
log.debug("SELECT");
};
});
As mentioned in some of the comments, my method was "static" (though being called on by an instance of the class)
public class A {
static void myMethod() {...}
}
A instance = spy(new A());
verify(instance).myMethod(); // still calls the original method because it's static
Work around was make an instance method or upgrade Mockito to a newer version with some config: https://stackoverflow.com/a/62860455/32453
Bit late to the party but above solutions did not work for me , so sharing my 0.02$
Mokcito version: 1.10.19
MyClass.java
private int handleAction(List<String> argList, String action)
Test.java
MyClass spy = PowerMockito.spy(new MyClass());
Following did NOT work for me (actual method was being called):
1.
doReturn(0).when(spy , "handleAction", ListUtils.EMPTY_LIST, new String());
2.
doReturn(0).when(spy , "handleAction", any(), anyString());
3.
doReturn(0).when(spy , "handleAction", null, null);
Following WORKED:
doReturn(0).when(spy , "handleAction", any(List.class), anyString());
I'm using a Calendar object to determine whether or not to increase the workload of a system based on current day/hour values. Given that this object uses static methods, I'm using PowerMock to mock the static methods with the following annotations:
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest({ Calendar.class })
The code under test is pretty simple (though my logic needs work, I know):
public void determineDefaultMaximumScans() throws ParseException{
parseTime();
Calendar cal = Calendar.getInstance();
int dayOfWeek = cal.get(Calendar.DAY_OF_WEEK);
System.out.println(cal.get(Calendar.DAY_OF_WEEK));
if(dayOfWeek == (Calendar.SATURDAY) || dayOfWeek == (Calendar.SUNDAY)){
setDefaultMax(calculateNewDefaultMax(getDefaultMax()));
System.out.println("defaultMax increased by 20%");
} else {
if(currentTime.after(afterHoursBegin) && currentTime.before(afterHoursEnd)){
System.out.println("Not afterhours. Maintaining current maximum.");
setDefaultMax(defaultMax);
System.out.println("Current Maximum number of scans: " + getDefaultMax());
}
}
}
My test case reads as follows:
#SuppressWarnings("static-access")
#Test
public void testDetermineMaximumScans() throws ParseException{
PowerMock.mockStatic(Calendar.class);
String beginningTime = "18:00";
String endingTime = "05:00";
mockAfterHoursBegin = parser.parse(beginningTime);
mockAfterHoursEnd = parser.parse(endingTime);
mockCurrentTime = parser.parse(parser.format(new Date()));
EasyMock.expect(Calendar.getInstance()).andReturn(mockCalendar);
EasyMock.expect(mockCalendar.get(Calendar.DAY_OF_WEEK)).andReturn(6);
EasyMock.replay(mocks);
offHourMaximumCalculator.determineDefaultMaximumScans();
EasyMock.verify(mocks);
}
As of now, all of my attempts to return a specific value result in the following assertion error. Now I vaguely understand why it's returning the default but I do not see why I can't force the value or how to get around this expectation. Mocks in general are still a frustrating mystery to me. What am I missing?
java.lang.AssertionError:
Expectation failure on verify:
Calendar.get(7): expected: 1, actual: 0
Mocks are fairly simple. But wanting to mock static methods is a big running after complexity. I generally do not recommend to mock something like a Calendar. If you do weird and complex thing with it, just encapsulate in something you can test and mock easily.
And in fact, we pretty much never use Calendar.getInstance(). It returns something according to the locale. But it's rare that you don't want a specific calendar i.e. GregorianCalendar. So just do new GregorianCalendar.
But anyway, add a protected method doing
protected Calendar newCalendar() {
return Calendar.getInstance(); // or new GregorianCalendar()
}
will take 2 minutes and then a simple partial mock will do the trick.
Finally, I also don't recommend to use Calendar. You have a much nicer API in java.util.date in Java 8.
All this said, here is how you should do it. Calendar is a system class, so you need to follow a real specific path which is explained here.
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest(Calendar.class)
public class MyTest {
#Test
public void testDetermineMaximumScans() throws ParseException {
PowerMock.mockStatic(Calendar.class);
Calendar calendar = mock(Calendar.class);
EasyMock.expect(Calendar.getInstance()).andReturn(calendar);
EasyMock.expect(calendar.get(Calendar.DAY_OF_WEEK)).andReturn(6);
// really important to replayAll to replay the static expectation
PowerMock.replayAll(calendar);
assertThat(Calendar.getInstance().get(Calendar.DAY_OF_WEEK)).isEqualTo(6);
// and verifyAll is you want to verify that the static call actually happened
PowerMock.verifyAll();
}
}
what is the absolute minimal mocking that must be done to pass this test?
code:
class PrivateStaticFinal {
private static final Integer variable = 0;
public static Integer method() { return variable + 1; }
}
test:
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest(PrivateStaticFinal.class)
class PrivateStaticFinalTest {
#Test
public void testMethod() {
//TODO PrivateStaticFinal.variable = 100
assertEquals(PrivateStaticFinal.method(), 101);
}
}
related: Mock private static final variables in the testing class (no clear answer)
Disclaimer: After a lot of hunting around on various threads I have found an answer. It can be done, but the general concensus is that it is not very safe but seeing as how you are doing this ONLY IN UNIT TESTS, I think you accept those risks :)
The answer is not Mocking, since most Mocking does not allow you to hack into a final. The answer is a little more "hacky", where you are actually modifying the private field when Java is calling is core java.lang.reflect.Field and java.lang.reflect.Modifier classes (reflection). Looking at this answer I was able to piece together the rest of your test, without the need for mocking that solves your problem.
The problem with that answer is I was running into NoSuchFieldException when trying to modify the variable. The help for that lay in another post on how to access a field that was private and not public.
Reflection/Field Manipulation Explained:
Since Mocking cannot handle final, instead what we end up doing is hacking into the root of the field itself. When we use the Field manipulations (reflection), we are looking for the specific variable inside of a class/object. Once Java finds it we get the "modifiers" of it, which tell the variable what restrictions/rules it has like final, static, private, public, etc. We find the right variable, and then tell the code that it is accessible which allows us to change these modifiers. Once we have changed the "access" at the root to allow us to manipulate it, we are toggling off the "final" part of it. We then can change the value and set it to whatever we need.
To put it simply, we are modifying the variable to allow us to change its properties, removing the propety for final, and then changing the value since it is no longer final. For more info on this, check out the post where the idea came from.
So step by step we pass in the variable we want to manipulate and...
// Mark the field as public so we can toy with it
field.setAccessible(true);
// Get the Modifiers for the Fields
Field modifiersField = Field.class.getDeclaredField("modifiers");
// Allow us to change the modifiers
modifiersField.setAccessible(true);
// Remove final modifier from field by blanking out the bit that says "FINAL" in the Modifiers
modifiersField.setInt(field, field.getModifiers() & ~Modifier.FINAL);
// Set new value
field.set(null, newValue);
Combining this all into a new SUPER ANSWER you get.
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest()
class PrivateStaticFinalTest {
#Test
public void testMethod(){
try {
setFinalStatic(PrivateStaticFinal.class.getDeclaredField("variable"), Integer.valueOf(100));
}
catch (SecurityException e) {fail();}
catch (NoSuchFieldException e) {fail();}
catch (Exception e) {fail();}
assertEquals(PrivateStaticFinal.method(), Integer.valueOf(101));
}
static void setFinalStatic(Field field, Object newValue) throws Exception {
field.setAccessible(true);
// remove final modifier from field
Field modifiersField = Field.class.getDeclaredField("modifiers");
modifiersField.setAccessible(true);
modifiersField.setInt(field, field.getModifiers() & ~Modifier.FINAL);
field.set(null, newValue);
}
}
Update
The above solution will work only for those constants which is initialized in static block.When declaring and initializing the constant at the same time, it can happen that the compiler inlines it, at which point any change to the original value is ignored.
I have a Red5 service function that receives a single string as a parameter, and another function that takes no parameters, like the code below:
public class AService
{
private String someName;
public void setName(String aName)
{
someName = aName;
}
.
.
public String makeMessage()
{
return("Hello, "+someName);
}
.
.
other functions
}
I also have an ActionScript function that calls the service function, using the dynamic parameter:
public class Connector
{
private var netConn: NetConnection;
public function invokeCall(theFunc:String,...theParams): void
{
var resp:Responder = new Responder(checkResult);
netConn.call(theFunc,resp,theParams);
}
.
.
}
I am aware that the "...theParams" is actually an array of parameter objects. I also know that the NetConnector class' call() method uses that parameter object array. Unfortunately, when I do an invokeCall() on my service's makeMessage() method (without putting in a parameter) like so:
invokeCall("AService.makeMethod");
I get a function nonexistent message from Red5. The only way I can make it work is to create two invoke methods, one with parameters and one without, and call that function without parameters.
Furthermore, calling my setName() function, like so:
invokeCallwithPrams("AService.setName","factor3");
doesn't seem to work unless I change the signature of my service function:
public class AService
{
private String someName;
public void setName(String[] aName)
{
someName = aName[0];
}
.
.
public String makeMessage()
{
return("Hello, "+someName);
}
.
.
other functions
}
which I don't mind (even though the Red5 documentation indicates that I shouldn't have to treat the parameter as an array), except that when I pass the string "factor3" into the NetConnection class' call() method, somehow it becomes "[factor3]" in setName()!
Obviously, something is screwy here, but I haven't been able to figure it out.
I am using Red5 Version 1.0.1 and my Actionscript is Version 3.
Can anyone explain to me what is going on and (more importantly) how to fix this???
If so, please advise...
UPDATE: The weirdness continues
I did a test in which I changed the parameter of the function I used to set up and invoke the NetConnection class' call() method. Instead of passing it a "...theParams", I changed it to theParams:String, like so:
public function invokeCall(theFunc:String,theParams:String): void
{
var resp:Responder = new Responder(checkResult);
netConn.call(theFunc,resp,theParams);
}
Interestingly, the brackets that appear in my service method setName() go away!
Whatever this problem is, it has something to do with the dynamic parameters in Actionscript. I suspect that I have found a bug in Actionscript 3 that does not allow it to properly handle dynamic parameters that are passed to a method from another method.
Has anyone else seen this problem? Is there any solution? The dynamic parameters are supposed to allow anyone to add parameters as necessary and make them any object that is necessary. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like you can use dynamic parameters passed from another method without them being screwed up.
This looks like a serious bug in Actionscript. Am I correct?
Someone please advise...
I found the solution. It is not a bug in Actionscript, it is a bit of strangeness in the language.
The basic information about the solution can be found here:
AS3 variable length argument expand to call another function with var length args
Based on what is there, I needed to do the following in the method I am using for invokeCallwithParams:
.
.
var conn:Connector = new Connector();
private function invokeCaller(fName:String,...cParams)
{
cParams.unshift(fName);
conn.invokeCall.apply(conn,cParams);
}
This eliminates the unnecessary brackets passed into my setName() service function, meaning that I can pass dynamic, variable length parameters from one method to another...
What is the best way to read system variables from Script Component.
Tried as below: Works fine when is User variable
base.PreExecute();
IDTSVariables100 variables = null;
VariableDispenser.LockForRead("System::ContainerStartTime");
VariableDispenser.GetVariables(out variables);
auditTimeStamp = Convert.ToDateTime(variables[1].Value);
System.Windows.Forms.MessageBox.Show(auditTimeStamp.ToString());
variables.Unlock();
when tried to read System variable throws following error:
Script Component has encountered an exception in user code:
Project name: SC_0bfc7da1c6fe4b83bc124b87eb4178e5
Exception from HRESULT: 0xC0010009
at Microsoft.SqlServer.Dts.Runtime.Wrapper.IDTSVariables100.get_Item(Object Index)
at ScriptMain.PreExecute()
at Microsoft.SqlServer.Dts.Pipeline.ScriptComponentHost.PreExecute()
any clues please.
Thanks
You have changed the index, from
Convert.ToDateTime(variables[1].Value);
to
Convert.ToDateTime(variables[0].Value);
Ok got this done as
#region Class Variables
int jobId;
DateTime auditTimeStamp;
IDTSVariables100 variables;
const string tableName = "ORGANISATION_PROVIDER";
#endregion
public override void PreExecute()
{
#region On PreExecute - Get the JOB ID passed - COMMON
base.PreExecute();
variables= null;
VariableDispenser.LockForWrite("System::ContainerStartTime");
VariableDispenser.GetVariables(out variables);
auditTimeStamp = Convert.ToDateTime(variables[0].Value);
variables.Unlock();
#endregion
}
This works fine..not sure what i have done wrong previously.
You could create a user variable that is evaluated as an expression that references the system variable. Something like this
#[System :: PackageName].