I have the code below and strange things hapened so I println something. When I passed to method String which matches the regex - printed :
---------->1
---------->2
How is this possible? How to return different return things?
def getInfo(String nameOfFile) {
def matcher = nameOfFile =~ /(\w+)_(\w+)_(\w+)/
if (matcher.matches()) {
matcher.each { fullName, CN, FN, PN->
println "---------->1"
return [nameOfFile, CN, FN, PN]
}
}
println "----------->2"
return [nameOfFile]
}
This just returns from the Closure, not the enclosing method
return [nameOfFile, CN, FN, PN]
Depending on what it is you're trying to do (you don't give any example inputs), you probably want findResult instead of each:
def getInfo( String nameOfFile ) {
def matcher = nameOfFile =~ /(\w+)_(\w+)_(\w+)/
if (matcher.matches()) {
matcher.findResult { fullName, CN, FN, PN->
[nameOfFile, CN, FN, PN]
}
}
else {
[nameOfFile]
}
}
Here is a very crude approximation of the Groovy code in Java (using 1.6):
import java.util.*;
import java.util.regex.*;
interface ClosureBlock {
Object each(String... args);
}
public class Runner {
public List<String> getInfo(String nameOfFile) {
List<String> results = new ArrayList<String>();
Pattern regex = Pattern.compile("(\\w+)_(\\w+)_(\\w+)");
Matcher matcher = regex.matcher(nameOfFile);
if (matcher.matches()) {
String fullName = matcher.group(0);
String CN = matcher.group(1);
String FN = matcher.group(2);
String PN = matcher.group(3);
ClosureBlock closure = new ClosureBlock() {
public Object each(String... args) {
List<String> results = new ArrayList<String>();
String fullName = args[0];
String CN = args[1];
String FN = args[2];
String PN = args[3];
results.add(fullName);
results.add(CN);
results.add(FN);
results.add(PN);
// this return does not exit getInfo()
System.out.println("----------->1");
return results;
}
};
// each returns an Object but we didn't assign it
closure.each(fullName, CN, FN, PN);
}
System.out.println("----------->2");
results.add(nameOfFile);
return results;
}
public static void main(String... args) {
Runner quick = new Runner();
List<String> list = quick.getInfo(args[0]);
System.out.println(list);
}
}
The key points are:
Runner defines an anonymous inner class with an each method. Calling return in the each method does not exit the getInfo method
Even though the each method returns an Object, we don't assign it to anything so the List<String> in getInfo is unaffected.
The Java is ugly and complex. The Groovy code is much more elegant, but regarding your question, the Java code illustrates the idea.
Related
Not using testing frameworks like MockK or Mockito seems to be becoming more and more popular. I decided to try this approach. So far so good, returning fake data is simple. But how do I verify that a function (that does not return data) has been called?
Imagine having a calss like this:
class TestToaster: Toaster {
override fun showSuccessMessage(message: String) {
throw UnsupportedOperationException()
}
override fun showSuccessMessage(message: Int) {
throw UnsupportedOperationException()
}
override fun showErrorMessage(message: String) {
throw UnsupportedOperationException()
}
override fun showErrorMessage(message: Int) {
throw UnsupportedOperationException()
}
}
With MockK I would do
verify { toaster.showSuccessMessage() }
I do not want to reinvent a wheel so decided to ask. Finding anything on Google seems to be very difficult.
Since this is a thing, I assume the point would be to totally remove mocking libraries and everything can be done without them.
The old school way to do it before any appearance of the mocking library is to manually create an implementation that is just for testing . The test implementation will store how an method is called to some internal state such that the testing codes can verify if a method is called with expected parameters by checking the related state.
For example , a very simple Toaster implementation for testing can be :
public class MockToaster implements Toaster {
public String showSuccesMessageStr ;
public Integer showSuccesMessageInt;
public String showErrorMessageStr;
public Integer showErrorMessageInt;
public void showSuccessMessage(String msg){
this.showSuccesMessageStr = msg;
}
public void showSuccessMessage(Integer msg){
this.showSuccesMessageInt = msg;
}
public void showErrorMessage(String msg){
this.showErrorMessageStr = msg;
}
public void showErrorMessage(Integer msg){
this.showErrorMessageInt = msg;
}
}
Then in your test codes , you configure the object that you want to test to use MockToaster. To verify if it does really call showSuccessMessage("foo") , you can then assert if its showSuccesMessageStr equal to foo at the end of the test.
A lot of people seem to be suggesting the very straight forward solution for this, which totally makes sense. I decided to go a bit fancy and achieve this syntax:
verify(toaster = toaster, times = 1).showErrorMessage(any<String>()).
I created simple Matchers:
inline fun <reified T> anyObject(): T {
return T::class.constructors.first().call()
}
inline fun <reified T> anyPrimitive(): T {
return when (T::class) {
Int::class -> Int.MIN_VALUE as T
Long::class -> Long.MIN_VALUE as T
Byte::class -> Byte.MIN_VALUE as T
Short::class -> Short.MIN_VALUE as T
Float::class -> Float.MIN_VALUE as T
Double::class -> Double.MIN_VALUE as T
Char::class -> Char.MIN_VALUE as T
String:: class -> "io.readian.readian.matchers.strings" as T
Boolean::class -> false as T
else -> {
throw IllegalArgumentException("Not a primitive type ${T::class}")
}
}
}
Added a map to store call count for each method to my TestToaster where the key is the name of the function and value is the count:
private var callCount: MutableMap<String, Int> = mutableMapOf()
Whenever a function gets called I increase current call count value for a method. I get current method name through reflection
val key = object {}.javaClass.enclosingMethod?.name + param::class.simpleName
addCall(key)
In oder to achieve the "fancy" syntax, I created inner subcalss for TestToaster and a verify function:
fun verify(toaster: Toaster , times: Int = 1): Toaster {
return TestToaster.InnerToaster(toaster, times)
}
That function sends current toaster instance to the inner subclass to create new instance and returns it. When I call a method of the subclass in my above syntax, the check happens. If the check passes, nothing happens and test is passed, if conditions not met - and exception is thrown.
To make it more general and extendable I created this interface:
interface TestCallVerifiable {
var callCount: MutableMap<String, Int>
val callParams: MutableMap<String, CallParam>
fun addCall(key: String, vararg param: Any) {
val currentCountValue = callCount.getOrDefault(key, 0)
callCount[key] = currentCountValue + 1
callParams[key] = CallParam(param.toMutableList())
}
abstract class InnerTestVerifiable(
private val outer: TestCallVerifiable,
private val times: Int = 1,
) {
protected val params: CallParam = CallParam(mutableListOf())
protected fun check(functionName: String) {
val actualTimes = getActualCallCount(functionName)
if (actualTimes != times) {
throw IllegalStateException(
"$functionName expected to be called $times, but actual was $actualTimes"
)
}
val callParams = outer.callParams.getOrDefault(functionName, CallParam(mutableListOf()))
val result = mutableListOf<Boolean>()
callParams.values.forEachIndexed { index, item ->
val actualParam = params.values[index]
if (item == params.values[index] || (item != actualParam && isAnyParams(actualParam))) {
result.add(true)
}
}
if (params.values.isNotEmpty() && !result.all { it } || result.isEmpty()) {
throw IllegalStateException(
"$functionName expected to be called with ${callParams.values}, but actual was with ${params.values}"
)
}
}
private fun isAnyParams(vararg param: Any): Boolean {
param.forEach {
if (it.isAnyPrimitive()) return true
}
return false
}
private fun getActualCallCount(functionName: String): Int {
return outer.callCount.getOrDefault(functionName, 0)
}
}
data class CallParam(val values: MutableList<Any> = mutableListOf())
}
Here is the complete class:
open class TestToaster : TestCallVerifiable, Toaster {
override var callCount: MutableMap<String, Int> = mutableMapOf()
override val callParams: MutableMap<String, TestCallVerifiable.CallParam> = mutableMapOf()
override fun showSuccessMessage(message: String) {
val key = object {}.javaClass.enclosingMethod?.name + message::class.simpleName
addCall(key, message)
}
override fun showSuccessMessage(message: Int) {
val key = object {}.javaClass.enclosingMethod?.name + message::class.simpleName
addCall(key, message)
}
override fun showErrorMessage(message: String) {
val key = object {}.javaClass.enclosingMethod?.name + message::class.simpleName
addCall(key, message)
}
override fun showErrorMessage(message: Int) {
val key = object {}.javaClass.enclosingMethod?.name + message::class.simpleName
addCall(key, message)
}
private class InnerToaster(
verifiable: TestCallVerifiable,
times: Int,
) : TestCallVerifiable.InnerTestVerifiable(
outer = verifiable,
times = times,
), Toaster {
override fun showSuccessMessage(message: String) {
params.values.add(message)
val functionName = object {}.javaClass.enclosingMethod?.name + message::class.simpleName
check(functionName)
}
override fun showSuccessMessage(message: Int) {
params.values.add(message)
val functionName = object {}.javaClass.enclosingMethod?.name + message::class.simpleName
check(functionName)
}
override fun showErrorMessage(message: String) {
params.values.add(message)
val functionName = object {}.javaClass.enclosingMethod?.name + message::class.simpleName
check(functionName)
}
override fun showErrorMessage(message: Int) {
params.values.add(message)
val functionName = object {}.javaClass.enclosingMethod?.name + message::class.simpleName
check(functionName)
}
}
companion object {
fun verify(toaster: Toaster, times: Int = 1): Toaster {
return InnerToaster(toaster as TestCallVerifiable, times)
}
}
}
I have not tested this extensively and it will evolve with time, but so far it works well for me.
I also wrote an article about this on Medium: https://sermilion.medium.com/unit-testing-verify-that-a-method-was-called-without-testing-frameworks-like-mockito-or-mockk-433ef8e1aff4
I feel like I have to be missing something that is obvious, or I am overcomplication what I am doing. I am attempting to test a method that contains several other methods. One method is passed an object to write data to a database, in which the ID will be updated. This ID is then set to a local variable and used in other methods and the return. I can't get my Assert.AreEqual to work because the ID out is always 0 when I expect it to be 12. I have not had a lot of experience with UnitTesting and less with JuskMock. I assume I am doing something wrong.
This simplified pseudo code demonstrates my issue.
public class MyObj: IMyObject
{
public int ID { get; set; }
public string Name {get;set;}
}
public int Query(string Name)
{
int ID = 0;
ID = _setID.FindPerson(Name);
if(ID = 0)
{
IMyObject myObj = new MyObj(0, Name);
_setID.WritePerson(myObj);
ID = myObj.ID;
}
_setID.WriteSomethingElse(ID)
return ID;
}
public delegate void SetIDDelegate<T1, T2>(T1 arg1, T2 arg2);
[TestMethod]
public void TestQuery_ReturnID()
{
IMyObject UTobj = new MyObj {
ID = 12,
msg = string.Empty
};
Mock.Arrange(() => _mockSetID.WritePerson(
Arg.IsAny<IMyObject>(),
))
.DoInstead(new SetIDDelegate<IMyObject, string>
((IMyObject a, string b) =>
{
a = UTobj;
}
)).MustBeCalled();
int IDout = _objProcessObj.Query();
Mock.Assert(_mockSetID);
Assert.AreEqual(UTobj.ID, IDout);
}
I was able to figure out my issue with my UT. I needed to update the object in the delegate, not replace it.
.DoInstead(new SetIDDelegate<IMyObject, string>
((IMyObject a, string b) =>
{
a.ID = UTobj.ID;
}
I have the following class I want to test:
public interface ISqlServiceByModule
{
DataSet GetPagedAggregateData(int clientId, int moduleId, int billTypeId, PagedTable result);
}
public class IncidentModuleService : IIncidentModuleService
{
private readonly ISqlServiceByModule sqlServiceByModule;
public IncidentModuleService(ISqlServiceByModule sqlServiceByModule)
{
if (sqlServiceByModule == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("sqlServiceByModule");
// Inject the ISqlServiceByModule dependency into the constructor
this.sqlServiceByModule = sqlServiceByModule;
}
public PagedTable GetData(int clientId, int moduleId, int billTypeId, Dictionary<string, string> queryStringParameters)
{
PagedTable result = new PagedTable(queryStringParameters);
DataSet dataSet = this.sqlServiceByModule.GetPagedAggregateData(clientId, moduleId, billTypeId, result);
// Map the DatSet to a PagedTable
if (dataSet == null || dataSet.Tables.Count == 0)
{
result.SetPagesFromTotalItems(0);
}
else
{
result.SetPagesFromTotalItems(Convert.ToInt16(dataSet.Tables[1].Rows[0][0]));
result.Listings = dataSet.Tables[0];
}
return result;
}
}
Specifically, I want to test the GetData method. My unit test looks like this:
[TestClass]
public class IncidentModuleServiceUnitTest
{
private DataSet incidentsData;
[TestInitialize]
public void SetUp()
{
this.incidentsData = new DataSet();
}
[TestMethod]
public void GetDataTestGetPagedAggregateDataIsCalled()
{
//-- Arrange
int billTypeId = 1;
int clientId = 1;
int moduleId = 1;
Dictionary<string, string> queryStringParameters = new Dictionary<string,string>();
PagedTable tempResult = new PagedTable(queryStringParameters);
DataSet dataSet = new DataSet();
dataSet.Tables.Add(new DataTable());
var mockSqlService = new Mock<ISqlServiceByModule>();
mockSqlService.Setup(r => r.GetPagedAggregateData(clientId, moduleId, billTypeId, tempResult)).Returns(this.incidentsData);
IncidentModuleService target = new IncidentModuleService(mockSqlService.Object);
//-- Act
var actual = target.GetData(clientId, moduleId, billTypeId, queryStringParameters);
//-- Assert
Assert.IsNull(actual.Listings);
mockSqlService.Verify(r => r.GetPagedAggregateData(clientId, moduleId, billTypeId, tempResult), Times.Once);
}
}
The error I am getting happens on the last line:
mockSqlService.Verify(r => r.GetPagedAggregateData(clientId, moduleId, billTypeId, tempResult), Times.Once);
And the exact error message is this:
{"\r\nExpected invocation on the mock once, but was 0 times: r =>
r.GetPagedAggregateData(.clientId, .moduleId, .billTypeId, .tempResult
Configured setups:\r\nr => r.GetPagedAggregateData(.clientId,
.moduleId, .billTypeId, .tempResult),
Times.Never
Performed invocations:\r\nISqlServiceByModule.GetPagedAggregateData(1,
1, 1, PagedTable)"}
Any idea why this is happening? It looks to me like the method in question is being called, but Moq doesn't like the parameters for some reason, even though they are the exact same ones in all three invocations, as far as I can tell.
PagedTable is a reference type not a value type. Therefore the parameters in Setup don't match what was called even though they look like they should be the same. You could use It.IsAny<PagedTable>() instead of tempResult.
See this answer for an example of how to check that the PagedTable parameter was the correct one.
I have a very basic question. Is it possible to convert a string into a closure? I tried evaluate() but it didn't work.
evaluate( "myFunction = function(val){ return dollarFormat( val ); }" );
What I have in mind is to save custom functions in the database as string and then run it as needed.
Thank you!
Edit: Just to clarify: I want to be able to save "function(val){ return dollarFormat( val ); }" as a string in database and be able to convert it into a functioning closure.
I would go with user2943775 answer:
<cfscript>
FileWrite("/ram/UDFs.cfm", "<cfset myFunction = function(val){ return dollarFormat( val ); }>")
include template="/ram/UDFs.cfm";
writedump(myFunction(10));
</cfscript>
And in your Application.cfc
component {
this.mappings["/ram"] = "ram://";
...
}
I came across a similar solution, though I was unable to use the in-memory filesystem due to security restrictions. In my Application.cfc, I added the following mapping:
this.mappings = {
"/models" = "#APP_ROOT_PATH#cfcs/models",
"/utils" = "#APP_ROOT_PATH#cfcs/utils",
"/modules" = "#APP_ROOT_PATH#_modules",
"/components" = "#APP_ROOT_PATH#cfcs",
"/udfs" = "#APP_ROOT_PATH#includes/udfs" // path for global (and temporary) UDFs
};
The UDF I created is as follows:
/**
* Takes a string representation of a function and returns it as a Closure
* #output false
* #return Closure
*/
private any function toClosure (required string closure) {
local.id = replace(createUUID(), "-", "", "all");
local.udfpath = "/udfs/udf#id#.cfm";
local.script = "<cfscript>local.fn#id# = #closure#;</cfscript>";
try {
fileWrite(expandPath(udfPath), script);
include udfpath;
} catch (any e) {
} finally {
try {
fileDelete(expandPath(udfPath));
} catch (any e) {}
}
if (!structkeyExists(local, "fn#id#") || !isClosure(local["fn#id#"])) {
throw (message="Unable to compile closure");
}
// return the closure
return local["fn#id#"];
}
And the result:
myFn = toClosure("function (num) { return num + 1; }");
myFn(1); // returns 2
Code below. I would like to use the obj.&method thing to pass around a reference to it. However, when trying to test that, mocking it doesn't work. Is there something in the test I can do to make it work?
The result of running the test is it throws the exception "should not get here".
import grails.test.mixin.TestFor
#TestFor(SomeController)
class SomeControllerTest {
void testSomething() {
def control = mockFor(SomethingElse)
control.demand.someMethod(1) { int num, String str, Map another, List param ->
println 'worked'
}
controller.obj = control.createMock()
controller.underTest()
control.verify()
}
}
class SomeController {
SomethingElse obj
void underTest() {
otherCall(obj.&someMethod) // **
}
void otherCall(toRun) {
String result = toRun(1, 'blah', null, null) // ** doesn't call mock here
}
}
class SomethingElse {
String someMethod(int num, String str, Map another, List param) {
throw new RuntimeException('should not get here')
}
}
Yes, don't mock SomethingElse. Use ExpandoMetaClass instead.
void testSomething() {
SomethingElse.metaClass.someMethod = {int num, String str, Map another,
List param ->
println 'worked'
}
controller.obj = new SomethingElse()
controller.underTest()
}
with the price of loosing the mock control.
A roundabout way would be to mock otherCall() as well
void testSomething() {
def control = mockFor(SomethingElse)
control.demand.someMethod(1) { int num, String str, Map another,
List param ->
println 'worked'
}
def obj = control.createMock()
controller.metaClass.otherCall = {Closure clos ->
delegate.obj.someMethod(1, 'blah', null, null)
}
controller.obj = obj
controller.underTest()
control.verify()
}
This way you can verify the mock control. But I am still skeptical about using mock objects and MethodClosure together.