This is my first app with Dart/Flutter/Riverpod, so any advice or comment about the code is welcome.
I'm using Hive as embedded db so the initial value for the provider's state is loaded asynchronously and using an AsyncValue of riverpod to wrapped it.
The following code works but I've got some doubts about the testing approach, so I would like to confirm if I'm using the Riverpod lib as It supposed to be used.
This is my provider with its deps (Preferences is a HiveObject to store app general config data):
final hiveProvider = FutureProvider<HiveInterface>((ref) async {
return await App.setUp();
});
final prefBoxProvider = FutureProvider<Box<Preferences>>((ref) async {
final HiveInterface hive = await ref.read(hiveProvider.future);
return hive.openBox<Preferences>("preferences");
});
class PreferencesNotifier extends StateNotifier<AsyncValue<Preferences>> {
late Box<Preferences> prefBox;
PreferencesNotifier(Future<Box<Preferences>> prefBoxFuture): super(const AsyncValue.loading()) {
prefBoxFuture.then((value) {
prefBox = value;
_loadCurrentPreferences();
});
}
void _loadCurrentPreferences() {
Preferences pref = prefBox.get(0) ?? Preferences();
state = AsyncValue.data(pref);
}
Future<void> save(Preferences prefs) async {
await prefBox.put(0, prefs);
state = AsyncValue.data(prefs);
}
Preferences? get preferences {
return state.when(data: (value) => value,
error: (_, __) => null,
loading: () => null);
}
}
final preferencesProvider = StateNotifierProvider<PreferencesNotifier, AsyncValue<Preferences>>((ref) {
return PreferencesNotifier(ref.read(prefBoxProvider.future));
});
And the following is the test case, I'm mocking the Hive box provider (prefBoxProvider):
class Listener extends Mock {
void call(dynamic previous, dynamic value);
}
Future<Box<Preferences>> prefBoxTesting() async {
final hive = await App.setUp();
Box<Preferences> box = await hive.openBox<Preferences>("testing_preferences");
await box.clear();
return box;
}
void main() {
test('Preferences value changes', () async {
final container = ProviderContainer(overrides: [
prefBoxProvider.overrideWithValue(AsyncValue.data(await prefBoxTesting()))
],);
addTearDown(() {
container.dispose();
Hive.deleteBoxFromDisk("testing_preferences");
});
final listener = Listener();
container.listen<AsyncValue<Preferences>>(
preferencesProvider,
listener,
fireImmediately: true,
);
verify(listener(null, const TypeMatcher<AsyncLoading>())).called(1);
verifyNoMoreInteractions(listener);
// Next line waits until we have a value for preferences attribute
await container.read(preferencesProvider.notifier).stream.first;
verify(listener(const TypeMatcher<AsyncLoading>(), const TypeMatcher<AsyncData>())).called(1);
Preferences preferences = Preferences.from(container.read(preferencesProvider.notifier).preferences!);
preferences.currentListName = 'Lista1';
await container.read(preferencesProvider.notifier).save(preferences);
verify(listener(const TypeMatcher<AsyncData>(), const TypeMatcher<AsyncData>())).called(1);
verifyNoMoreInteractions(listener);
final name = container.read(preferencesProvider.notifier).preferences!.currentListName;
expect(name, equals('Lista1'));
});
}
I've used as reference the official docs about testing Riverpod and the GitHub issue related with AsyncValues
Well, I found some problems to verify that the listener is called with the proper values, I used the TypeMatcher just to verify that the state instance has got the proper type and I check ("manually") the value of the wrapped object's attribute if It's the expected one. Is there a better way to achieve this ?
Finally, I didn't find too many examples with StateNotifier and AsyncValue as state type, Is there a better approach to implement providers that are initialized with deferred data ?
I didn't like too much my original approach so I created my own Matcher to compare wrapped values in AsyncValue instances:
class IsWrappedValueEquals extends Matcher {
final dynamic value;
IsWrappedValueEquals(this.value);
#override
bool matches(covariant AsyncValue actual, Map<dynamic, dynamic> matchState) =>
equals(actual.value).matches(value, matchState);
#override
Description describe(Description description) => description.add('Is wrapped value equals');
}
In the test, the final part is a bit different:
Preferences preferences = Preferences.from(container.read(preferencesProvider.notifier).preferences!);
preferences.currentListName = 'Lista1';
await container.read(preferencesProvider.notifier).save(preferences);
// the following line is the new one
verify(listener(IsWrappedValueEquals(Preferences()), IsWrappedValueEquals(preferences))).called(1);
verifyNoMoreInteractions(listener);
}
I prefer my custom Matcher to the original code, but I feel that there are too many custom code to test something, apparently, common.
If anyone can tell me a better solution for this case, It'd be great.
Related
I'm new to ember and trying to figure out how to unit test, using sinon, the sessionStorage based on url parameters when that page is visited. I've tried a few things but still can't get the desired result. It passes even if I change the 'sessionValue' without editing the query param.
Thank you in advance.
ember component
beforeModel(transition) {
//transition will contain an object containing a query parameter. '?userid=1234' and is set in the sessionStorage.
if(transition.queryparam.hasOwnProperty('userid')){
sessionStorage.setItem('user:id', transition.queryparam)
}
}
Ember test
test('Session Storage contains query param value', async assert => {
let sessionKey = "user:id";
let sessionValue = "1234"
let store = {};
const mockLocalStorage = {
getItem: (key) => {
return key in store ? store[key] : null;
},
setItem: (key, value) => {
store[key] = `${value}`;
},
clear: () => {
store = {};
}
};
asserts.expect(1);
let spy = sinon.spy(sessionStorage, "setItem");
spy.calledWith(mockLocalStorage.setItem);
let stub = sinon.stub(sessionStorage, "getItem");
stub.calledWith(mockLocalStorage.getItem);
stub.returns(sessionValue);
await visit('/page?userid=1234');
mockLocalStorage.setItem(sessionKey, sessionValue);
assert.equal(mockLocalStorage.getItem(sessionKey), sessionValue, 'storage contains value');
})
Welcome to Ember!
There are many ways to test, and the below suggestion is one way (how I would approach interacting with the SessionStorage).
Instead of re-creating the SessionStorage API in your test, how do you feel about using a pre-made proxy around the Session Storage? (ie: "Don't mock what you don't own")
Using: https://github.com/CrowdStrike/ember-browser-services/#sessionstorage
Your app code would look like:
#service('browser/session-storage') sessionStorage;
beforeModel(transition) {
// ... details omitted ...
// note the addition of `this` -- the apis are entirely the same
// as SessionStorage
this.sessionStorage.setItem('user:id', ...)
}
then in your test:
module('Scenario Name', function (hooks) {
setupApplicationTest(hooks);
setupBrowserFakes(hooks, { sessionStorage: true });
test('Session Storage contains query param value', async assert => {
let sessionKey = "user:id";
let sessionValue = "1234"
let sessionStorage = this.owner.lookup('browser/session-storage');
await visit('/page?userid=1234');
assert.equal(sessionStorage.getItem(sessionKey), '1234', 'storage contains value');
});
})
With this approach, sinon isn't even needed :)
Sorry if this seems a dumb question. I'm learning clean architecture as dictated by Rob Martin, and I've having a tiny bit of trouble writing one of my tests.
I wrote a couple functions in a Hive repo. Here's the code
import 'package:hive/hive.dart';
import 'package:movie_browser/features/SearchMovie/domain/entities/movie_detailed_entity.dart';
abstract class HiveMovieSearchRepoAbstract {
Future<void> cacheMovieDetails(MovieDetailed movie);
Future<MovieDetailed> getCachedMovieDetails(String id);
}
// const vars to prevent misspellings
const String MOVIEDETAILSBOX = "MovieDetailedBox";
const String SEARCHBOX = "SearchBox";
class HiveMovieSearchRepo implements HiveMovieSearchRepoAbstract {
Box movieDetailsBox = Hive.box(MOVIEDETAILSBOX) ?? null;
// TODO implement searchbox
// final searchBox = Hive.box(SEARCHBOX);
Future<void> cacheMovieDetails(MovieDetailed movie) async {
/// expects a MovieDetailed to cache. Will cache that movie
movieDetailsBox ?? await _openBox(movieDetailsBox, MOVIEDETAILSBOX);
movieDetailsBox.put('${movie.id}', movie);
}
Future<MovieDetailed> getCachedMovieDetails(String id) async {
/// expects a string id as input
/// returns the MovieDetailed if cached previously
/// returns null otherwise
movieDetailsBox ?? await _openBox(movieDetailsBox, MOVIEDETAILSBOX);
return await movieDetailsBox.get('$id');
}
_openBox(Box box, String type) async {
await Hive.openBox(type);
return Hive.box(type);
}
}
I can't think of how to test this? I want two cases, one where the box is already opened, and one case where it isn't.
Specifically, it's these lines I want to test
movieDetailsBox ?? await _openBox(movieDetailsBox, MOVIEDETAILSBOX);
_openBox(Box box, String type) async {
await Hive.openBox(type);
return Hive.box(type);
}
I thought about mocking the Box object then doing something like....
when(mockHiveMovieSearchRepo.getCachedMovieDetails(some_id)).thenAnswer((_) async => object)
but wouldn't that bypass the code I want tested and always show as positive?
Thanks so much for the help
i don't know if i fully understand your question but you can try something like this
abstract class HiveMovieSearchRepoAbstract {
Future<void> cacheMovieDetails(MovieDetailed movie);
Future<MovieDetailed> getCachedMovieDetails(String id);
}
// const vars to prevent misspellings
const String MOVIEDETAILSBOX = "MovieDetailedBox";
const String SEARCHBOX = "SearchBox";
class HiveMovieSearchRepo implements HiveMovieSearchRepoAbstract {
final HiveInterface hive;
HiveMovieSearchRepo({#required this.hive});
#override
Future<void> cacheMovieDetails(MovieDetailed cacheMovieDetails) async {
/// expects a MovieDetailed to cache. Will cache that movie
try {
final moviedetailbox = await _openBox(MOVIEDETAILSBOX);
moviedetailbox.put('${movie.id}', movie);
} catch (e) {
throw CacheException();
}
}
Future<MovieDetailed> getCachedMovieDetails(String id) async {
/// expects a string id as input
/// returns the MovieDetailed if cached previously
/// returns null otherwise
try {
final moviedetailbox = await _openBox(MOVIEDETAILSBOX);
if (moviedetailbox.containsKey(boxkeyname)) {
return await movieDetailsBox.get('$id');
}
return null;
} catch (e) {
return CacheException();
}
}
Future<Box> _openBox(String type) async {
try {
final box = await hive.openBox(type);
return box;
} catch (e) {
throw CacheException();
}
}
}
And to test it you can do something like this
class MockHiveInterface extends Mock implements HiveInterface {}
class MockHiveBox extends Mock implements Box {}
void main() {
MockHiveInterface mockHiveInterface;
MockHiveBox mockHiveBox;
HiveMovieSearchRepo hiveMovieSearchRepo;
setUp(() {
mockHiveInterface = MockHiveInterface();
mockHiveBox = MockHiveBox();
hiveMovieSearchRepo = HiveMovieSearchRepo(hive: mockHiveInterface);
});
group('cacheMoviedetails', () {
test(
'should cache the movie details',
() async{
//arrange
when(mockHiveInterface.openBox(any)).thenAnswer((_) async => mockHiveBox);
//act
await hiveMovieSearchRepo.cacheMovieDetails(tcacheMovieDetails);
//assert
verify(mockHiveBox.put('${movie.id}', tmovie));
verify(mockHiveInterface.openBox("MovieDetailedBox"));
});
});
group('getLocalCitiesAndCountriesAtPage', () {
test('should when', () async {
//arrange
when(mockHiveInterface.openBox(any))
.thenAnswer((realInvocation) async => mockHiveBox);
when(mockHiveBox.get('$id'))
.thenAnswer((realInvocation) async => tmoviedetails);
//act
final result =
await hiveMovieSearchRepo.getCachedMovieDetails(tId);
//assert
verify(mockHiveInterface.openBox(any));
verify(mockHiveBox.get('page${tpage.toString()}'));
expect(result, tmoviedetails);
});
});
}
You should add some tests also for the CacheExeption().
Hope this help you.
So, I wrote this post 9 months. Stackoverflow just sent me a notification saying it's a popular question, so I'll answer it for anyone else wondering the same thing
Easy way to make this testable is change Box to an arg passed into the class, like so
abstract class ClassName {
final Box movieDetailsBox;
final Box searchBox;
ClassName({
this.moveDetailsBox,
this.searchBox,
});
}
this makes the boxes mockable and testable
You should mock the hive interface and box;
I developing an application an flutter and use clean architecture.
I created a use case return a List from a stream. The stream sends the List from an observer. Above is the code:
abstract class GetAllServicesObserver implements Observer {
void onGetAllSuccess(List<Service> services);
void onGetAllError(Exception error);
}
class GetAllServices extends UseCase<GetAllServicesObserver, NoParams> {
final User _user;
final ServiceRepository _serviceRepository;
StreamSubscription _subscription;
GetAllServices({
#required User user,
#required ServiceRepository serviceRepository,
}) : _user = user,
_serviceRepository = serviceRepository;
#override
action(observer, params) async {
_subscription?.cancel();
final _stream = _serviceRepository.all(_user);
_subscription = _stream.listen((services) {
observer.onGetAllSuccess(services);
}, onError: (e) {
observer.onGetAllError(e);
});
}
}
And I created an unit test to this use case:
test('should to return all services', () {
//setup
when(repository.all(user)).thenAnswer((_) async* {
yield List<Service>();
});
final useCase = GetAllServices(user: user, serviceRepository: repository);
useCase.observer = observer;
//run
useCase();
//verify
verify(observer.onGetAllSuccess(List<Service>()));
});
}
But it's returns the follow message and not pass:
ERROR: No matching calls (actually, no calls at all).
(If you called verify(...).called(0);, please instead use verifyNever(...);.)
Would anyone know what the problem is?
Have you tried untilCalled before verify? e.g.:
await untilCalled(some method that will be called)
We have some TypeScript code using the Aurelia framework and Dialog plugin that we are trying to test with Jasmine, but can't work out how to do properly.
This is the source function:
openDialog(action: string) {
this._dialogService.open({ viewModel: AddAccountWizard })
.whenClosed(result => {
if (!result.wasCancelled && result.output) {
const step = this.steps.find((i) => i.action === action);
if (step) {
step.isCompleted = true;
}
}
});
}
We can create a DialogService spy, and verify the open method easily - but we can't work out how to make the spy invoke the whenClosed method with a mocked result parameter so that we can then assert that the step is completed.
This is the current Jasmine code:
it("opens a dialog when clicking on incomplete bank account", async done => {
// arrange
arrangeMemberVerificationStatus();
await component.create(bootstrap);
const vm = component.viewModel as GettingStartedCustomElement;
dialogService.open.and.callFake(() => {
return { whenClosed: () => Promise.resolve({})};
});
// act
$(".link, .-arrow")[0].click();
// assert
expect(dialogService.open).toHaveBeenCalledWith({ viewModel: AddAccountWizard });
expect(vm.steps[2].isCompleted).toBeTruthy(); // FAILS
done();
});
We've just recently updated our DialogService and ran into the same issue, so we've made this primitive mock that suited our purposes so far. It's fairly limited and doesn't do well for mocking multiple calls with different results, but should work for your above case:
export class DialogServiceMock {
shouldCancelDialog = false;
leaveDialogOpen = false;
desiredOutput = {};
open = () => {
let result = { wasCancelled: this.shouldCancelDialog, output: this.desiredOutput };
let closedPromise = this.leaveDialogOpen ? new Promise((r) => { }) : Promise.resolve(result);
let resultPromise = Promise.resolve({ closeResult: closedPromise });
resultPromise.whenClosed = (callback) => {
return this.leaveDialogOpen ? new Promise((r) => { }) : Promise.resolve(typeof callback == "function" ? callback(result) : null);
};
return resultPromise;
};
}
This mock can be configured to test various responses, when a user cancels the dialog, and scenarios where the dialog is still open.
We haven't done e2e testing yet, so I don't know of a good way to make sure you wait until the .click() call finishes so you don't have a race condition between your expect()s and the whenClosed() logic, but I think you should be able to use the mock in the test like so:
it("opens a dialog when clicking on incomplete bank account", async done => {
// arrange
arrangeMemberVerificationStatus();
await component.create(bootstrap);
const vm = component.viewModel as GettingStartedCustomElement;
let mockDialogService = new MockDialogService();
vm.dialogService = mockDialogService; //Or however you're injecting the mock into the constructor; I don't see the code where you're doing that right now.
spyOn(mockDialogService, 'open').and.callThrough();
// act
$(".link, .-arrow")[0].click();
browser.sleep(100)//I'm guessing there's a better way to verify that it's finished with e2e testing, but the point is to make sure it finishes before we assert.
// assert
expect(mockDialogService.open).toHaveBeenCalledWith({ viewModel: AddAccountWizard });
expect(vm.steps[2].isCompleted).toBeTruthy(); // FAILS
done();
});
I have an API Controller which publishes a command using NServiceBus. I am using NUnit and NSubstitute for testing. I want to test that certain properties from the model are populated on the command
Here is my controller with a route.
[RoutePrefix("api/fileService")]
public class FileServiceController : ApiController
{
[HttpPost]
[Route("releasefile")]
public async Task<IHttpActionResult> ReleaseFile(FileReleaseAPIModels.ReleaseFileModel model)
{
var currentUser = RequestContext.Principal?.Identity as ClaimsIdentity;
if (model.FileType.Equals("ProductFile"))
{
_logger.Info($"Releasing Product files for date: {model.FileDate.ToShortDateString()} ");
_bus.Send<IReleaseProductFiles>("FileManager.Service", t =>
{
t.FileId = Guid.NewGuid();
t.RequestedDataDate = model.FileDate;
t.RequestingUser = currentUser?.Name;
t.RequestDateTime = DateTime.Now;
});
}
return Ok();
}
}
In my test, I substitute(mock) Ibus and try to validate the call received. Here is the test method:
[Test]
public async Task TestReleaseProductsFile()
{
var bus = Substitute.For<IBus>();
var dbContent = _container.Resolve<IFileManagerDbContext>();
var apiContext = new FileServiceController(bus, dbContent);
//Create a snapshot
var releaseDate = DateTime.Now.Date;
var result = await apiContext.ReleaseFile(new ReleaseFileModel
{
FileDate = releaseDate,
FileType = "ProductFile"
});
Assert.That(result, Is.Not.Null, "Result is null");
Assert.That(result, Is.TypeOf<OkResult>(), "Status code is not ok");
bus.Received(1)
.Send<IReleaseProductFiles>(Arg.Is<string>("FileManager.Service"), Arg.Is<Action<IReleaseProductFiles>>(
action =>
{
action.FileId = Guid.NewGuid();
action.RequestedDataDate = releaseDate;
action.RequestingUser = String.Empty;
action.RequestDateTime = DateTime.Now;
}));
}
This results in error - even though the message is actually sent. Here is the error message:
NSubstitute.Exceptions.ReceivedCallsException : Expected to receive exactly 1 call matching:
Send<IReleaseProductFiles>("Capelogic.Service", Action<IReleaseProductFiles>)
Actually received no matching calls.
Received 1 non-matching call (non-matching arguments indicated with '*' characters):
Send<IReleaseProductFiles>("Capelogic.Service", *Action<IReleaseProductFiles>*)
I am obviously missing something obvious here.
The problem here is with the Action<IReleaseProductFiles> argument to Send -- we can't automatically tell if two different actions are the same. Instead, NSubstitute relies on the references being equivalent. Because both the test and the production code create their own Action instance, these will always be different and NSubstitute will say the calls don't match.
There are a few different options for testing this. These examples relate to Expression<Func<>>, but the same ideas apply to Action<>s.
In this case I'd be tempted to test this indirectly:
[Test]
public async Task TestReleaseProductsFile()
{
var bus = Substitute.For<IBus>();
var returnedProductFiles = Substitute.For<IReleaseProductFiles>();
// Whenever bus.Send is called with "FileManager.Service" arg, invoke
// the given callback with the `returnedProductFiles` object.
// We can then make sure the action updates that object as expected.
bus.Send<IReleaseProductFiles>(
"FileManager.Service",
Arg.Invoke<IReleaseProductFiles>(returnedProductFiles));
// ... remainder of test ...
Assert.That(result, Is.TypeOf<OkResult>(), "Status code is not ok");
Assert.That(returnedProductFiles.FileId, Is.Not.EqualTo(Guid.Empty));
Assert.That(returnedProductFiles.RequestedDataDate, Is.EqualTo(releaseDate));
Assert.That(returnedProductFiles.RequestingUser, Is.EqualTo(String.Empty));
}
I'd recommend having a look through the previously mentioned answer though to see if there is a better fit for your situation.