I have a final class, something like this:
public final class RainOnTrees{
public void startRain(){
// some code here
}
}
I am using this class in some other class like this:
public class Seasons{
RainOnTrees rain = new RainOnTrees();
public void findSeasonAndRain(){
rain.startRain();
}
}
and in my JUnit test class for Seasons.java I want to mock the RainOnTrees class. How can I do this with Mockito?
Mocking final/static classes/methods is possible with Mockito v2 only.
add this in your gradle file:
testImplementation 'org.mockito:mockito-inline:2.13.0'
This is not possible with Mockito v1, from the Mockito FAQ:
What are the limitations of Mockito
Needs java 1.5+
Cannot mock final classes
...
Mockito 2 now supports final classes and methods!
But for now that's an "incubating" feature. It requires some steps to activate it which are described in What's New in Mockito 2:
Mocking of final classes and methods is an incubating, opt-in feature. It uses a combination of Java agent instrumentation and subclassing in order to enable mockability of these types. 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
After you created this file, Mockito will automatically use this new engine and one can do :
final class FinalClass {
final String finalMethod() { return "something"; }
}
FinalClass concrete = new FinalClass();
FinalClass mock = mock(FinalClass.class);
given(mock.finalMethod()).willReturn("not anymore");
assertThat(mock.finalMethod()).isNotEqualTo(concrete.finalMethod());
In subsequent milestones, the team will bring a programmatic way of using this feature. We will identify and provide support for all unmockable scenarios. Stay tuned and please let us know what you think of this feature!
add this in your build file:
if using gradle: build.gradle
testImplementation 'org.mockito:mockito-inline:2.13.0'
if using maven: pom.xml
<dependency>
<groupId>org.mockito</groupId>
<artifactId>mockito-inline</artifactId>
<version>2.13.0</version>
<scope>test</scope>
</dependency>
this is a configuration to make mockito work with final classes
If you faced the Could not initialize inline Byte Buddy mock maker. (This mock maker is not supported on Android.)
Add the Byte Buddy dependency to your build.gradle file:
testImplementation 'net.bytebuddy:byte-buddy-agent:1.10.19'
src: https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/net.bytebuddy/byte-buddy
You cannot mock a final class with Mockito, as you can't do it by yourself.
What I do, is to create a non-final class to wrap the final class and use as delegate. An example of this is TwitterFactory class, and this is my mockable class:
public class TwitterFactory {
private final twitter4j.TwitterFactory factory;
public TwitterFactory() {
factory = new twitter4j.TwitterFactory();
}
public Twitter getInstance(User user) {
return factory.getInstance(accessToken(user));
}
private AccessToken accessToken(User user) {
return new AccessToken(user.getAccessToken(), user.getAccessTokenSecret());
}
public Twitter getInstance() {
return factory.getInstance();
}
}
The disadvantage is that there is a lot of boilerplate code; the advantage is that you can add some methods that may relate to your application business (like the getInstance that is taking a user instead of an accessToken, in the above case).
In your case I would create a non-final RainOnTrees class that delegate to the final class. Or, if you can make it non-final, it would be better.
In Mockito 3 and more I have the same problem and fixed it as from this link
Mock Final Classes and Methods with Mockito
as follow
Before Mockito can be used for mocking final classes and methods, it needs to be > configured.
We need to add a text file to the project's src/test/resources/mockito-extensions directory named org.mockito.plugins.MockMaker and add a single line of text:
mock-maker-inline
Mockito checks the extensions directory for configuration files when it is loaded. This file enables the mocking of final methods and classes.
Use Powermock. This link shows, how to do it: https://github.com/jayway/powermock/wiki/MockFinal
Just to follow up. Please add this line to your gradle file:
testCompile group: 'org.mockito', name: 'mockito-inline', version: '2.8.9'
I have tried various version of mockito-core and mockito-all. Neither of them work.
I had the same problem. Since the class I was trying to mock was a simple class, I simply created an instance of it and returned that.
I guess you made it final because you want to prevent other classes from extending RainOnTrees. As Effective Java suggests (item 15), there's another way to keep a class close for extension without making it final:
Remove the final keyword;
Make its constructor private. No class will be able to extend it because it won't be able to call the super constructor;
Create a static factory method to instantiate your class.
// No more final keyword here.
public class RainOnTrees {
public static RainOnTrees newInstance() {
return new RainOnTrees();
}
private RainOnTrees() {
// Private constructor.
}
public void startRain() {
// some code here
}
}
By using this strategy, you'll be able to use Mockito and keep your class closed for extension with little boilerplate code.
Another workaround, which may apply in some cases, is to create an interface that is implemented by that final class, change the code to use the interface instead of the concrete class and then mock the interface. This lets you separate the contract (interface) from the implementation (final class). Of course, if what you want is really to bind to the final class, this will not apply.
Time saver for people who are facing the same issue (Mockito + Final Class) on Android + Kotlin. As in Kotlin classes are final by default. I found a solution in one of Google Android samples with Architecture component. Solution picked from here : https://github.com/googlesamples/android-architecture-components/blob/master/GithubBrowserSample
Create following annotations :
/**
* This annotation allows us to open some classes for mocking purposes while they are final in
* release builds.
*/
#Target(AnnotationTarget.ANNOTATION_CLASS)
annotation class OpenClass
/**
* Annotate a class with [OpenForTesting] if you want it to be extendable in debug builds.
*/
#OpenClass
#Target(AnnotationTarget.CLASS)
annotation class OpenForTesting
Modify your gradle file. Take example from here : https://github.com/googlesamples/android-architecture-components/blob/master/GithubBrowserSample/app/build.gradle
apply plugin: 'kotlin-allopen'
allOpen {
// allows mocking for classes w/o directly opening them for release builds
annotation 'com.android.example.github.testing.OpenClass'
}
Now you can annotate any class to make it open for testing :
#OpenForTesting
class RepoRepository
Actually there is one way, which I use for spying. It would work for you only if two preconditions are satisfied:
You use some kind of DI to inject an instance of final class
Final class implements an interface
Please recall Item 16 from Effective Java. You may create a wrapper (not final) and forward all call to the instance of final class:
public final class RainOnTrees implement IRainOnTrees {
#Override public void startRain() { // some code here }
}
public class RainOnTreesWrapper implement IRainOnTrees {
private IRainOnTrees delegate;
public RainOnTreesWrapper(IRainOnTrees delegate) {this.delegate = delegate;}
#Override public void startRain() { delegate.startRain(); }
}
Now not only can you mock your final class but also spy on it:
public class Seasons{
RainOnTrees rain;
public Seasons(IRainOnTrees rain) { this.rain = rain; };
public void findSeasonAndRain(){
rain.startRain();
}
}
IRainOnTrees rain = spy(new RainOnTreesWrapper(new RainOnTrees()) // or mock(IRainOnTrees.class)
doNothing().when(rain).startRain();
new Seasons(rain).findSeasonAndRain();
Give this a try:
Mockito.mock(SomeMockableType.class,AdditionalAnswers.delegatesTo(someInstanceThatIsNotMockableOrSpyable));
It worked for me. "SomeMockableType.class" is the parent class of what you want to mock or spy, and someInstanceThatIsNotMockableOrSpyable is the actual class that you want to mock or spy.
For more details have a look here
This can be done if you are using Mockito2, with the new incubating feature which supports mocking of final classes & methods.
Key points to note:
1. Create a simple file with the name “org.mockito.plugins.MockMaker” and place it in a folder named “mockito-extensions”. This folder should be made available on the classpath.
2. The content of the file created above should be a single line as given below:
mock-maker-inline
The above two steps are required in order to activate the mockito extension mechanism and use this opt-in feature.
Sample classes are as follows:-
FinalClass.java
public final class FinalClass {
public final String hello(){
System.out.println("Final class says Hello!!!");
return "0";
}
}
Foo.java
public class Foo {
public String executeFinal(FinalClass finalClass){
return finalClass.hello();
}
}
FooTest.java
public class FooTest {
#Test
public void testFinalClass(){
// Instantiate the class under test.
Foo foo = new Foo();
// Instantiate the external dependency
FinalClass realFinalClass = new FinalClass();
// Create mock object for the final class.
FinalClass mockedFinalClass = mock(FinalClass.class);
// Provide stub for mocked object.
when(mockedFinalClass.hello()).thenReturn("1");
// assert
assertEquals("0", foo.executeFinal(realFinalClass));
assertEquals("1", foo.executeFinal(mockedFinalClass));
}
}
Hope it helps.
Complete article present here mocking-the-unmockable.
Yes same problem here, we cannot mock a final class with Mockito. To be accurate, Mockito cannot mock/spy following:
final classes
anonymous classes
primitive types
But using a wrapper class seems to me a big price to pay, so get PowerMockito instead.
I think you need think more in principle. Instead you final class use his interface and mock interface instead.
For this:
public class RainOnTrees{
fun startRain():Observable<Boolean>{
// some code here
}
}
add
interface iRainOnTrees{
public void startRain():Observable<Boolean>
}
and mock you interface:
#Before
fun setUp() {
rainService= Mockito.mock(iRainOnTrees::class.java)
`when`(rainService.startRain()).thenReturn(
just(true).delay(3, TimeUnit.SECONDS)
)
}
Please look at JMockit. It has extensive documentation with a lot of examples. Here you have an example solution of your problem (to simplify I've added constructor to Seasons to inject mocked RainOnTrees instance):
package jmockitexample;
import mockit.Mocked;
import mockit.Verifications;
import mockit.integration.junit4.JMockit;
import org.junit.Test;
import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
#RunWith(JMockit.class)
public class SeasonsTest {
#Test
public void shouldStartRain(#Mocked final RainOnTrees rain) {
Seasons seasons = new Seasons(rain);
seasons.findSeasonAndRain();
new Verifications() {{
rain.startRain();
}};
}
public final class RainOnTrees {
public void startRain() {
// some code here
}
}
public class Seasons {
private final RainOnTrees rain;
public Seasons(RainOnTrees rain) {
this.rain = rain;
}
public void findSeasonAndRain() {
rain.startRain();
}
}
}
Solutions provided by RC and Luigi R. Viggiano together is possibly the best idea.
Although Mockito cannot, by design, mock final classes, the delegation approach is possible. This has its advantages:
You are not forced to change your class to non-final if that is what your API intends in the first place (final classes have their benefits).
You are testing the possibility of a decoration around your API.
In your test case, you deliberately forward the calls to the system under test. Hence, by design, your decoration does not do anything.
Hence you test can also demonstrate that the user can only decorate the API instead of extending it.
On a more subjective note:
I prefer keeping the frameworks to a minimum, which is why JUnit and Mockito are usually sufficient for me. In fact, restricting this way sometimes forces me to refactor for good as well.
If you trying to run unit-test under the test folder, the top solution is fine. Just follow it adding an extension.
But if you want to run it with android related class like context or activity which is under androidtest folder, the answer is for you.
Add these dependencies for run mockito successfully :
testImplementation 'org.mockito:mockito-core:2.24.5'
testImplementation "org.mockito:mockito-inline:2.24.5"
Mocking final classes is not supported for mockito-android as per this GitHub issue. You should use Mockk instead for this.
For both unit test and ui test, you can use Mockk with no problem.
If you need to use Mockito in an instrumented test in Android (i. e. running in an Android device), you cannot use mockito-inline. There is a special mockito-android version which doesn't solve the "final class" problem either. The only solution which seems to work is the Dexmaker library. The only limitation is that it works only in Android P (Android 9, API 28) and higher. It can be imported as follows:
androidTestImplementation "com.linkedin.dexmaker:dexmaker-mockito-inline:2.28.1"
Beware that there is also a "dexmaker-mockito" version which doesn't work for final classes either. Make sure you import "dexmaker-mockito-inline".
As others have stated, this won't work out of the box with Mockito. I would suggest using reflection to set the specific fields on the object that is being used by the code under test. If you find yourself doing this a lot, you can wrap this functionality in a library.
As an aside, if you are the one marking classes final, stop doing that. I ran across this question because I am working with an API where everything was marked final to prevent my legitimate need for extension (mocking), and I wish that the developer had not assumed that I would never need to extend the class.
For us, it was because we excluded mockito-inline from koin-test. One gradle module actually needed this and for reason only failed on release builds (debug builds in the IDE worked) :-P
For final class add below to mock and call static or non static.
1- add this in class level
#SuppressStatucInitializationFor(value ={class name with package})
2- PowerMockito.mockStatic(classname.class) will mock class
3- then use your when statement to return mock object when calling method of this class.
Enjoy
I was able to overcome this message:
org.mockito.exceptions.base.MockitoException:
Cannot mock/spy class org.slf4j.impl.Log4jLoggerAdapter
Mockito cannot mock/spy because :
final or anonymous class
from this: log = spy(log);
By using this instead:
log = mock(Logger.class);
Then it works.
I guess that "default" logger adapter is an instance of a final class so I couldn't "spy" it, but I could mock the whole thing. Go figure...
This may mean that you could substitute it for some other "non final" instance if you have that handy, as well. Or a simplified version, etc. FWIW...
I am writing the steps I followed after various unsuccessful attempts to mock final/private classes and their methods in Java 11, which finally worked for me.
Create a file named org.mockito.plugins.MockMaker inside
your test/resources/mockito-extensions folder. Please create
mockito-extensions folder if not present already.
Add a single line mock-maker-inline as the content of the above org.mockito.plugins.MockMaker file
Add
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PowerMockIgnore({"javax.management.*", "jdk.internal.reflect.*", "com.sun.org.apache.xerces.*", "javax.xml.*", "org.xml.*", "org.w3c.*"})
#PrepareForTest(Utility.class)
annotations at the class level.
Setup process in the test class
#Before
public void setup () {
MockitoAnnotations.initMocks(this);
Mockito.mockStatic(ClassToBeMocked.class);
}
Use Mockito.when(..).thenReturn(..) for assertions
In case of multiple test cases, add the below code
#After
public void after() {
Mockito.framework().clearInlineMocks();
}
The mockito version which I am using: 3.9.0
Java version: 11
Didn't try final, but for private, using reflection remove the modifier worked ! have checked further, it doesn't work for final.
Related
I am moving from Thorntail to Quarkus.
In my tests I used to create a #deployment method in which I put only what was needed by the tests. In particular I didn't put a Class having a #Startup annotation (because I didn't want to test that ...).
When I moved to QUARKUS, I suppress de #deployment static method, then when I launch the tests #Startup is ... started and a lot of bad things happen which prevent me from testing what I want to test (well, it crashes because it tries to connect to services which are not available).
So the question is : is there a way to exclude some package or class when lauching a test with quarkusTest ?
I finally created a class :
#ApplicationScoped
public class ApplicationLifeCycle {
private final Logger log = Logger.getLogger(getClass());
#Inject
Startup startup;
void onStart(#Observes StartupEvent ev) {
log.info("The application is starting with profile " + ProfileManager.getActiveProfile());
if (!ProfileManager.getActiveProfile().equalsIgnoreCase("test")) {
startup.getModel();
}
}
void onStop(#Observes ShutdownEvent ev) {
log.info("The application is stopping...");
startup.stopMQ();
}
}
A bit ugly isn't it ?
Is there a better way to do it ?
Quarkus adds a few capabilities to handle such scenarios regarding CDI, which can be found here: https://quarkus.io/guides/cdi-reference#enable_build_profile
For instance:
#ApplicationScoped
#UnlessBuildProfile("test")
class ConnectsToExternalService implements ExternalConnector {}
Will prevent CDI from injecting this implementation when the quarkus profile is "test", which quarkus sets when running a #QuarkusTest.
So if you inject "ExternalConnector" in a #QuarkusTest, you'll get an Unsatisfied dependency exception, which can be fixed with:
#ApplicationScoped
#IfBuildProfile("test") // not required if class is in "test" dir
class MockExternalService implements ExternalConnector {}
Using this approach you can prevent external connections but also mock them.
To top things off, one can now disable all StartupEvent and ShutdownEvent observers declared on application using a QuarkusTestProfile in combination with #TestProfile (See Quarkus Testing with Different Profiles). You have to return true in disableApplicationLifecycleObservers in that case.
I have an extension method which is used to read a particular claim from the current ClaimsPrincipal. But I also need to check this value against a list of items which I have in the appsettings.json.
I had this working by using a ConfigurationBuilder() to read the appsettings directly in much the same way as the startup does, although instead of using
.SetBasePath(Directory.GetCurrentDirectory())
as I do in the startup, I was using
.SetBasePath(Path.GetDirectoryName(Assembly.GetEntryAssembly().Location))
Which although isn't pretty, works fine.
However, when the Unit tests are run none of the following get me to where the appsettings are
Directory.GetCurrentDirectory()
Path.GetDirectoryName(Assembly.GetEntryAssembly().Location)
Path.GetDirectoryName(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().Location)
and I cannot see a way of getting the IHostingEnvironment or something similar into the extension method to read out the appsettings, or indeed to ditch the ConfigurationBuilder() and get at IOptions in the extension method, in such a way that the unit test and the running code will work correctly.
I assume there must be a way of doing this? Although I expect that I should simply not be trying at all and lift the check against the list of items into another class entirely...
Putting business logic that may ever require dependencies into static methods is not recommended. This makes it difficult to inject dependencies into them. Options are few:
Redesign the static method into a service so dependencies can be injected through the constructor. (Recommended)
public class Foo : IFoo
{
private readonly IOptions<FooOptions> optionsAccessor;
public Foo(IOptions<FooOptions> optionsAccessor)
{
this.optionsAccessor = optionsAccessor ??
throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(optionsAccessor));
}
public void DoSomething()
{
var x = this.optionsAccessor;
// Same implementation as your static method
}
}
Inject the dependencies as parameters of the extension method.
public static void DoSomething(this object o, IOptions<FooOptions> optionsAccessor)
{
// Implementation
}
Redesign the static method to be a facade over an abstract factory like this example.
I have the following legacy class that I want to add some unit tests to using Xunit and Moq
The psuedo code for the class I want to test is below:-
public class Foo : IFoo
{
public StatusResposne GetStatus(string jobId)
{
.
.
var response = GetRequest(doc, targeturl);
.
.
}
private XDocument GetRequest(XDocument doc, string url)
{
}
}
Now i want to test GetStatus but im order to do that i need to mock the GetRequest method.
Can anyone suggest the easiest way to do this?
Cheers
Unit testing ought to be black-box testing, because otherwise your tests will be too brittle: every time you change an implementation detail, you'll need to fix all the tests that break.
When you view Foo as a black box, only GetStatus is visible. The fact that there's a private GetRequest method is irrelevant. Someone else might come by tomorrow and decide to refactor the GetStatus implementation in such a way that the GetRequest method is no longer used - perhaps that method will no longer be there.
You should test the observable behaviour of GetStatus, instead of attempting to test implementation details.
i need to mock the GetRequest method
That's not possible. You can only mock interfaces and accessible virtual methods.
Do you have access to the source code?
One way could be to make GetRequest protected virtual and override it in some inherited class and use this class for the unit tests.
Better would be to move this method to some other class and use it as a dependency.
I have a class (lets call it A) that:
In the constructor takes a config and based on it, creates a stub of
a web service and stores a reference to it in a private field.
Has a few methods that call web methods and some stuff inbetween.
I started to create a unit test that:
Creates an instance of a class A with a dummy configuration.
Through reflection it injects the mocked web service stub.
Although that web service has plenty of methods.
Should I mock them all (in every test, with different data)?
Or maybe I should create another layer that encapsulates only the web methods that are being used?
Or there is another approach?
You should create a wrapper interface around your webservice, and make your class under test take a dependency on that interface, rather than directly on the webservice; you can then mock the interface. Only make that interface expose the methods of the webservice that you find interesting. This is known as a facade pattern, and is detailed here.
Without having a clue about what you're testing, aim for something like this:
public interface IWebserviceWrapper
{
Whatever DoStuff(int something);
}
public class WebserviceWrapper : IWebserviceWrapper
{
private WebService _theActualWebservice;
public WebserviceWrapper(Webservice theService)
{
_theActualWebService = theService;
}
public Whatever DoStuff(int something)
{
return _theActualWebservice.DoSomething(something);
}
}
Then your test would look like this (in this case, using MOQ)
public void Test_doing_something()
{
Mock<IWebserviceWrapper> _serviceWrapperMock = new Mock<IWebserviceWrapper>();
_serviceWrapperMock.SetUp(m => m.DoStuff(12345)).Returns(new Whatever());
var classUnderTest = new ClassUnderTest(_serviceWrapperMock.Object);
var result = classUnderTest.Dothings(12345);
Assert.Whatever....
}
Short answer Yes :). Long answer you should use some kind of mocking lib for example: http://code.google.com/p/mockito/ and in your unit test mock the WS stub and pass it to the tested class. That is the way of the force :)
When you unit test a class, you always want to make sure to only test that class and not include its dependencies. To do that, you will have to mock your WS to have it return dummy data when methods are called. Depending on your scenarios, you do not have to mock ALL the methods for each test, I would say only those that are used.
For an example about mocking, you can read this article: http://written-in-codes.blogspot.ca/2011/11/unit-tests-part-deux.html
This seems like an easy enough issue but I can't seem to find the keywords to effect my searches.
I'm trying to unit test by mocking out all objects within this method call. I am able to do so to all of my own creations except for this one:
public void MyFunc(MyVarClass myVar)
{
Image picture;
...
picture = Image.FromStream(new MemoryStream(myVar.ImageStream));
...
}
FromStream is a static call from the Image class (part of c#). So how can I refactor my code to mock this out because I really don't want to provide a image stream to the unit test.
You can create an IImageLoader interface. The "normal" implementation just calls Image.FromStream, while your unit test version can do whatever you need it to do.
Moq and most other mocking frameworks don't support mocking out static methods. However, TypeMock does support mocking out static methods and that might be of interest to you if you're willing to purchase it. Otherwise, you'll have to refactor so that an interface can be mocked...
You could wrap the static function into Func type property which can be set by the unit test with a mock or stub.
public class MyClass
{
..
public Func<Image, MemoryStream> ImageFromStream =
(stream) => Image.FromStream(stream);
public void MyFunc(MyVarClass myVar)
{
...
picture = ImageFromStream(new MemoryStream(myVar.ImageStream));
...
}
..
}
This can be acheived with Moles, a Visual Studio 2010 Power Tools. The Moles code would look like this:
// replace Image.FromStream(MemoryStream) with a delegate
MImage.FromStreamMemoryStream = stream => null;