I have an action method in my controller as below
public ActionResult Index()
{
var supplier = GetSupplierForUser();
var model = SupplierService.GetOutstandingItems(supplier);
return View(model);
}
I've setup the supplier service method as
var supplierService = new Mock<ISupplierService>();
var supplier = new Supplier { Name = "Some Name",Id = 100};
supplierService.Setup(s => s.GetOutstandingItems(supplier))
.Returns(outstandingSupplierItemInfo.Object);
I don't know how can we setup the method Supplier GetSupplierForUser() which is present in the base controller to return a Supplier object. From the moq setup above a null supplier is always passed to SupplierService.GetOutstandingItems(supplier)
Any ideas? thanks
Maybe you need:
supplierService.Setup(s => s.GetOutstandingItems(It.IsAny<Supplier>()))
.Returns(outstandingSupplierItemInfo.Object);
The It.IsAny<> stuff will make your Setup match any incoming object (argument).
Since you use a loose mock, if no Setup matches the arguemnts in question, Moq will just return null. Consider using MockBehavior.Strict to have an exception instead.
If you do not use It.IsAny<>, Moq will have to try to see if the supplier that is passed to Moq, "is equal to" the supplier you used when you made the Setup. Here it can become important what .Equals(...) semantics your type (class or struct) Supplier has.
If you do not have the relevant Equals semantics, but still want to restrict the Setup to a particular situation, try this instead:
supplierService
.Setup(s => s.GetOutstandingItems(It.Is((Supplier s) => s.Name == "Some Name" && s.Id == 100)))
.Returns(outstandingSupplierItemInfo.Object);
Related
I am new in unit-testing in Grails application using Spock. However I would like to ask the following question. Lets say I want to run a test for the following function testfun.
class TestFun{
boolean testfun(long userId, long orderId){
User user = User.findByUserId(userId)
if(user == null)return false
Order order = Order.findByUserAndId(user, orderId)
HashMap<String, Object> = orderContent
orderContent= order.orderContent // the order has an element orderContent for storing the elements that one user orders
if(orderContent!=null){
orderContent.put("meal",1)
order.orderContent = orderContent
return true
}
return false
}
}
The corresponding unit test in that case would be:
class TestFun extends Specification {
def setup() {
GroovySpy(User, global: true)
GroovySpy(Order, global: true)
}
def "test funtest"() {
User user = new User(2).save()
Order order = new Order(3).save()
when:
service.testfun(2,3) == result
then:
2*User.findByUserId(2) >> Mock(User)
1*Order.findByUserAndId(_ as User, 1)>> Mock(Order)
result == true
}
}
However, I think that I have to mock the order.orderContent and I do not know how to mock it. Right now the test fails, because the orderContent is null so the testfun returns false.
Can anyone help me on that?
There are several things going on here, and hopefully fixing them will help you get the test running and passing.
I can't recall for certain, but I believe GroovySpy is an old feature, that isn't used with Spock tests. Instead of using that to mock a domain class, you should be using the #Mock annotation before the class definition, to specify which domain classes you would like to mock.
While you can mock the domain classes, you'll also need to actually populate the in-memory database with those objects, either in a setup: block, or in a setup() method, if they are needed for multiple tests.
You mention creating mocks, and using the Spock Mock() method will create a mock of that object, but you don't want to use that for domain objects. It is more typically used for service classes that will be manually injected into your test class.
When saving a mock domain class, I would suggest including the parameters flush: true, failOnError: true, that way any validation that fails will be indicated immediately and on the appropriate line. Without this, you can get some strange errors to occur later in the tests.
I don't know what you're doing in the when: block, but you should not be doing an assertion with == at that point, do all of those in the then: block.
Given all of this, I think you test class should look more like this:
#Mock([User, Order])
class TestFun extends Specification {
def setup() {
// This object will have an id of 1, if you want a different id, you can either specify it, or create more objects
User user = new User(first: "john", last: "doe").save(flush: true, failOnError: true)
new Order(user: user).save(flush: true, failOnError: true)
}
def "test funtest"() {
User user = new User(2).save()
Order order = new Order(3).save()
when:
boolean result = service.testfun(1, 1)
then:
// Optionally you can just use "result" on the next line, as true will be assumed
result == true
}
}
I am trying to unit test the following method with Moq, but I am running into issues with the accessibility of manipulating some properties on these classes, and even mocking them up for that matter.
public string GetClientIpAddress(HttpRequestMessage request)
{
if (request.Properties.ContainsKey("MS_HttpContext"))
return ((HttpContextWrapper)request.Properties["MS_HttpContext"]).Request.UserHostAddress;
if (request.Properties.ContainsKey(RemoteEndpointMessageProperty.Name))
return ((RemoteEndpointMessageProperty)request.Properties[RemoteEndpointMessageProperty.Name]).Address;
return "IP Address Unavailable";
}
In order to test, I have created an instance of HttpRequestMessage that I am passing in as a parameter. I am then adding a mock of HttpRequest and HttpContext, like so...
// Assign
var mockHttpRequestBase = new Mock<HttpRequest>();
mockHttpRequestBase.Setup(m => m.UserHostAddress).Returns("127.0.0.1");
var mockHttpContext = new Mock<HttpContext>();
mockHttpContext.Setup(m => m.Request).Returns(mockHttpRequestBase.Object);
var httpRequestMessage = new HttpRequestMessage();
httpRequestMessage.Properties.Add(new KeyValuePair<string, object>("MS_HttpContext", mockHttpRequestBase.Object));
var apiCachedController = new ApiCachedController();
// Act
var address = apiCachedController.GetClientIpAddress(httpRequestMessage);
// Assert
Assert.AreEqual(address, "127.0.0.1");
EDIT: Sorry for not being clearer on the specific problem(s) I'm having. HttpRequest is unable to be mocked. I get a NotSupportedException that "type to mock must be an interface or an abstract or non-sealed class." I've tried using HttpRequestBase and HttpContextWrapper in place of HttpRequest and HttpContext, respectively, but I receive an InvalidCastException stating, "Unable to cast object of type 'Castle.Proxies.HttpRequestBaseProxy' to type 'System.Web.HttpContextWrapper'."
Moq can't create a Mock object from a class itself, you've got to create (and use) an interface in your code and then create a Mock from that.
I have a several grails controllers that I generated and modified slightly. I'm working with the generated unit tests and getting them to pass, but I think I'm doing it the hard way. This is what I have.
package edu.liberty.swiper
import grails.test.mixin.*
import org.junit.*
#TestFor(AttendanceController)
#Mock([Attendance, Location, Reason, Person, LocCapMode, GuestContactMode, UserAccount])
class AttendanceControllerTests {
def location
def reason
void setUp() {
def capMode = new LocCapMode(description: "loc cap mode", username: "testuser").save(failOnError: true)
def guestMode = new GuestContactMode(description: "Guest Contact Mode", username: "testuser").save(failOnError: true)
location = new Location(description: "foo", locCapMode: capMode, username: "testuser", guestContactMode: guestMode).save(failOnError: true)
reason = new Reason(description: "test reason", username: "testuser").save(failOnError: true)
def person = new Person(firstName: "John", lastName: "Smith", lid: "L12345678", mi: "Q", pidm: 12345).save(failOnError: true)
def userAccount = new UserAccount(pidm: 12345, username: "testuser").save(failOnError:true)
}
def populateValidParams(params) {
assert params != null
params.personId = '12345'
params.username = "testuser"
params["location.id"] = location.id
params["reason.id"] = reason.id
params.timeIn = new Date()
}
void testIndex() {
...
}
void testList() {
...
}
void testCreate() {
...
}
void testSave() {
controller.save()
assert model.attendanceInstance != null
assert view == '/attendance/create'
response.reset()
populateValidParams(params)
controller.save()
assert response.redirectedUrl == '/attendance/show/1'
assert controller.flash.message != null
assert Attendance.count() == 1
}
void testEdit() {
...
}
...
What I'm hoping for is the ability to dynamically mock domain object, i.e. expect(Attendance.save()).andReturn(null) or expect(Attendance.save()).andReturn(testAttendance), so that I don't have to create the web of associated objects in my setUp method that are necessary to validate the domain object that is being manipulated by the controller.
Am I just looking at this all wrong? It seems like I should be able to decouple the controller logic from the validation logic., so that I can just tell the mock to tell the controller that validation passed or failed. Thanks in advance.
I don't think there is a way to tell the mock that the validation of a certain object that is handled by a controller passed or failed but I might be wrong. But as I understand it your main concern is the creation of the web of associated objects right?
Without knowing what your controller looks like I would guess that you are getting needed domain objects in your controller by ID (e.g. Location) and load a Person by pidm and so on.
To simplify the creation of needed domain objects you could use .save(validate: false).
Your setUp method could look like this:
location = new Location().save(validate: false)
reason = new Reason().save(validate: false)
If you only need objects with valid IDs this would be sufficient.
new Person(pidm: 12345).save(validate: false)
new UserAccount(username: "testuser").save(validate: false)
Set certain fields to be able to use a finder like UserAccount.findByUserName().
So if your controller does something like
location = Location.get(params["location.id"])
reason = Reason.get(params["reason.id"])
userAccount = UserAccount.findByUserName(params.username)
...
new Attendance(location: location, reason: reason, userAccount: userAccount, ...)
the aforementioned lines should be satisfactory for your setUp method.
.save(validate: false) is very useful to just set values that are really needed in your test. I hope I got the whole thing right and I could be of help.
When mocking for unit tests, you don't have to have a complete object graph with every required value to test a single domain. For example, you could have something like this..
def department = new Department(name: "Accounting").save(validate: false)
def user = new User(username: "gdboling", department: department).save()
Assuming the only 2 required fields for User are username and department, but department might have many other fields that would fail validation, this will still work if all you really need to test is User.
You still have to specify them in #Mock, you just don't have to populate every bloody field. :)
and thank you in advance for any and all your assistance.
I have a method that I'm trying to test.
Within this method is a call to UserMembership.Validate()
//custom override but the code isn't functional yet and is outside the scope of the test.
I want to therefore mock (using moq) the return result so that the actual test of the method can succeed.
Here is the code
public LoginResponse Login(LoginRequest request)
{
var response = new LoginResponse(request.RequestId);
// Validate client tag and access token
if (!ValidateRequest(request, response, Validate.ClientTag | Validate.AccessToken))
return response;
if (!UserMembership.ValidateUser(request.UserName, request.Password))
{
response.Acknowledge = AcknowledgeType.Failure;
response.Messages = "Invalid username and/or password.";
//response.MessageCode = -4;
return response;
}
_userName = request.UserName;
return response;
}
So, my test is for LoginResponse() but I want to 'fake' the UserMembership return value (bool) to true...
Simple enough I'm sure for you guys.
TIA, Hugh.
You could probably re-title your question to "How do you use a mocking framework with unit testing 99% of the time," because you're right on track for doing just that - a very typical usage.
You're going to want to extract an interface from your UserMembership class (right click inside the class, select "refactor" and then "extract interface."), then use Moq to create mock instances of that interface for use within your tests. Then you can use Moq to "setup" the behavior of that mock to do anything you want it to during your test. The syntax would look like this:
var userMembershipMock = new Mock<IUserMembership>();
userMembershipMock.Setup(m=> m.ValidateUser(It.Is<string>(str=> str == "myUserName"), It.Is<string>(str=> str == "myPassword"))).Returns(true);
Then you would create a new instance of your class, passing in your mock instance of IUserMembership (but since you'll make your class's constructor takes an argument of the interface type, your class won't care whether you're passing it a mock or an actual UserMembership instance
MyClass myClass = new MyClass(userMembershipMock.Object);
after which you could begin actually testing the behavior of your MyClass:
var request = new LoginRequest { UserName = "myUserName", Password = "myPassword" };
LoginResponse response = myClass.Login(request);
And then you can assert that your class's response is what you expect:
Assert.AreEqual(AcknowledgeType.Success, response.Acknowledge);
or you can verify that your mock's method (or property) was invoked as you expected:
userMembershipMock.Verify(m=> m.ValidateUser(It.Is<string>(str=> str == "myUserName"), It.Is<string>(str=> str == "myPassword")), Times.Once());
and so on.
The Moq quick start page is kind of sort of a one-page read, and can teach you 99% of everything that you need to know to use it.
The only way I can think of to mock UserMembership in this case (assuming it's not a property) is to use an IoC framework like Castle Windsor or Ninject. When you use an IoC container you would refactor your calls to UserMembership into an interface (IUserMembership) and use the container to provide an implementation:
if (Container.Resolve<IUserMembership>().ValidateUser(request.UserName, request.Password))
Then in your unit test Setup you would register the implementation of IUserMembership to be the mock object:
var mock = new Mock<IUserMembership>();
Container.Register<IUserMemberhip>().Instance(mock.Object);
You would have to also create a production implementation. If this is the standard UserMembership class, this implementation will probably do nothing other than UserMembership. Although, there are other ways to mimic this kind of duck typing.
I have the following as my unit test:
void testCreateDealer() {
mockForConstraintsTests(Dealer)
def _dealer= new Dealer( dealerName:"ABC",
Email:"abc-motors#global.com",
HeadOffice:"",
isBranch:false)
assertFalse _dealer.validate()
}
But when I run the test I get the following error:
No signature of method: static com.myCompany.Dealer.findByDealerNameIlike() is applicable for argument types: (java.lang.String) values: [ABC]
I use some custom constraints in my domain class. How Can I test this?
static constraints = {
dealerName(blank:false, validator:
{ val, obj ->
def similarDealer = Dealer.findByDealerNameIlike(val)
return !similarDealer || (obj.id == similarDealer.id)
}
)
Try changing mockForConstraintsTests() to mockDomain() - you're using a Dealer.findX() method in the constraint, which relies on the Dealer domain.
Incidentally, the test will still fail unless you've created a similar dealer in the setUp() method of the test class.
In unit tests, even with mockDomain, the id attribute of domain objects is not set automatically, or auto-incremented. All of the domain objects you create will have an id of null unless you explicitly set it.
Your test is probably failing because the test obj.id == similarDealer.id is true, since they both have id: null. Try setting the id attribute of your mocked dealer objects.