I'm sure this is a fairly common situation. I'm using the Spring Security Core plugin and want to create a domain model that has a Person limited to certain roles:
class Workgroup {
Person manager
...
static constraints = {
manager(validator: {mgr ->
// it feels like there should be a more elegant, groovy way of doing this.
def auths = mgr.getAuthorities();
def returny = false
auths.each {
if(it.authority == 'ROLE_MANAGER')
{
returny = true
}
}
return returny
})
}
}
This test fails like a mofo:
void testInvalidManager() {
def nick = new Person(username:'Nick')
def nonManagerRole = new Role(authority:'ROLE_EMPLOYEE')
UserRole.create(nick,nonManagerRole)
def awesome = new Workgroup(name:'mooCows', manager:nick)
mockForConstraintsTests(Workgroup, [awesome])
assertFalse awesome.validate()
assertEquals "validator", awesome.errors["manager"]
}
testInvalidManager Error No signature of method: users.UserRole.save() is applicable for argument types: (java.util.LinkedHashMap) values: [[flush:false, insert:true]] Possible solutions: wait(), any(), wait(long), use([Ljava.lang.Object;), isCase(java.lang.Object), each(groovy.lang.Closure)
groovy.lang.MissingMethodException: No signature of method: users.UserRole.save() is applicable for argument types: (java.util.LinkedHashMap) values: [[flush:false, insert:true]]
Possible solutions: wait(), any(), wait(long), use([Ljava.lang.Object;), isCase(java.lang.Object), each(groovy.lang.Closure)
at users.UserRole.create(UserRole.groovy:32)
at users.UserRole.create(UserRole.groovy)
at users.UserRole$create.call(Unknown Source)
at users.WorkgroupTests.testInvalidManager(WorkgroupTests.groovy:17)
Is this better covered in Integration than Unit Testing? Do I need to mock UserRole (if so, how?)? How are these types of tests normally done?
UserRole.create() calls save(), so you need to use mockDomain() instead of just mockForConstraintsTests().
But that's only if you're ok with testing the domain model with mocks, which I would never do. The mocking support in Grails should be used when testing Controllers or other classes that use domain classes but shouldn't be bothered with real persistence, creating a database (even in-memory), etc. By removing that dependency you're concentrating on the current tier, trusting that the other tier is already properly tested. But when you use mocking to test domain classes, you're really just testing the mocking framework. So I always use integration tests for domain classes so they run against a real database.
To answer the implicit question from your code example, I'd write the constraint as
static constraints = {
manager validator: { mgr ->
mgr.authorities.find { it.authority == 'ROLE_MANAGER' } != null
}
}
The issue with its bulk is that you're using each() when a regular for loop would be preferable since you can return from a for loop. Use each() only when you really want to invoke the closure on every instance. Here's one that's less groovy than the other one but uses a for loop:
static constraints = {
manager validator: { mgr ->
for (auth in mgr.getAuthorities()) {
if (it.authority == 'ROLE_MANAGER') {
return true
}
}
return false
}
}
Related
I have the following piece of code inside a service class named OrderService in Groovy on Grails. I want to make a unit test for this class. User and Order are domain classed. A user has many orders.
boolean testfun(long userId, lond orderId){
User user = User.findByUserId(userId)
if(user == null)return false
Order order = Order.findByUserAndId(user, orderId)
if(order == null)return false
return true
}
The unit test that I am trying to write is the following (using Spock):
#TestFor(OrderService)
#Mock([User, Order])
class OrderServiceSpec extends Specification{
def "test funtest"() {
User user = new User(2)
Order order = new Order()
order.metaClass.id = 3// I want to assign the id of the order in domain
order.save()
user.addToOrders(order)
user.save()
expect:
service.testfun(2,3) == true
}
}
However this test fails because the order is null. Can anyone help me?
Another question is: is this test a unit test? or should I write an integration test in grails?
It depends on what you're actually trying to test, but this can be a unit test—I'd just recommend modifying it a little bit to isolate only the service method that you're interested in testing. You're not looking to test the domain classes at all, so it's best to mock/stub the behavior that you need from them to test the service functionality.
A good way to do this is with Spock's support for interaction based testing via mock objects. Basically we specify that when the service's testfun() method is called, we expect User.findById() to be called once and Order.findByUserAndId() to be called once as well. Spock then allows us to stub out each method call so that we specify what we want the method to return. When we run the test, the stub will be used, not the actual GORM method.
Some complexity lies with stubbing out static methods (like GORM methods), but you can use a GroovySpy to get the job done.
Also, I'm assuming you meant to use User.findById() instead of User.findByUserId()?
Something along these lines should work for you:
def "test funtest"() {
setup:
// Global so that it replaces all instances/references of the
// mocked type for the duration of the feature method.
GroovySpy(User, global: true)
GroovySpy(Order, global: true)
when:
def result = service.testfun(2,3)
then:
// No need to return real objects, so use a mock
1 * User.findById(2) >> Mock(User)
1 * Order.findByUserAndId(_ as User, 3) >> Mock(Order)
result == true
when:
result = service.testfun(2,3)
then:
1 * User.findById(2) >> null
result == false
}
Note that we've isolated the service method. Any collaborating objects (User and Order) are only being interacted with via stubs and we can test the functionality of the service method without worrying about GORM at all.
I have been trying to figure this out for 2 days now and I am really stuck and frustrated. I have a domain object with a service which is being used for custom validation. The domain looks like this:
class Llama {
String name
transient myFetcherService
static transients = [
'myFetcherService'
]
static constraints = {
name validator: { val, obj ->
if (obj.nameExists(val) == true) {
//return some error here.
}
}
}
protected boolean nameExists(String name) {
List<Llama> llamasList = myFetcherService.fetchExistingLlamasByName(name)
if (llamasList.isEmpty()) {
return false
}
return true
}
}
Now, I have another Service, which simply saves a list of Llama objects. It looks like this:
class LlamaFactoryService {
public void createLlamas(List<String> llamaNames) {
llamaNames.each { name ->
new Llama(name: name).save()
}
}
}
In my test. I keep getting this error:
Failure: createLlamas should create Llammas (com.myLlamaProject.LlamaFactoryServiceSpec)
| java.lang.NullPointerException: Cannot invoke method myFetcherService on null object
I don't understand. In my tests, added a metaClass for the service in the "given" section. When it tries to save, it's telling that the service is null. This is what my test looks like:
given:
def myFetcherService = mockFor(MyFetcherService)
myFetcherService.demand.fetchExistingLlamasByName {def name -> return []}
Llama.metaClass.myFetcherService = myFetcherService.createMock()
when:
service.createLlamas(['Pablo','Juan','Carlos'])
then:
//some validations here....
I also tried using metaClass on the method nameExists() like:
Llama.metaClass.myFetcherService = { def name -> false }
, but it gives me the same nullPointerException as the one above. Could someone point me to the right direction? I'm a bit stuck. :(
Thanks in advance for reading and helping.
You're using a unit test and the general rule for unit tests is that beans generally aren't created for you, so you'll need to inject them yourself.
(Code edited to reflect the fact I misread the question)
I think you want a testing pattern something like:
given:
def mockMyFetcherService = Mock(MyFetcherService) // create the mock
Llama.metaClass.getMyFetcherService = { mockMyFetcherService } // inject the dependency
def returnList = [] // let's just define this here and you can re-use this pattern in other tests more easily
when:
service.createLlamas(['Pablo','Juan','Carlos'])
then:
// tell Spock what you expect to have happen with your Mock - return the List you defined above
3 * mockFetcherService.fetchExistingLlamasByName(_) >> returnList
If the injection of the service into the metaClass doesn't work (suggested here), you could always try using the defineBeans{} closure within the unit test itself (http://www.block-consult.com/blog/2011/08/17/inject-spring-security-service-into-domain-class-for-controller-unit-testing/).
Thus you could try:
defineBeans {
myFetcherService(MockMyFetcherService)
}
where MockMyFetcherService is defined in the same file that defines the test. This is the approach followed here:
See here for examples of more Spock interactions.
If you're using Grails 2.4.3 or below you'll need to put CGLIB in BuildConfig.groovy but I see here that it's already done for you in 2.4.4, so you should be ok just to use Mock(classname).
Say I've got a controller with an action that receives two parameters.
It invokes two services, one with each parameter, the services both return strings
each of those strings are passed as arguments to a template
the result is passed to Ok and returned.
I want to write a simple unit test that ensures:
1 - The correct services are invoked with the correct parameters
2 - The return values from the services are passed to the correct attributes of the template
What is the best way to do that?
Using Mockito with Specs2, I mock services to verify their method calls.
My controller is instantiated by Spring. That allows me to treat it is as a class instead of object. => That is essential to make controller testable. Here an example:
#Controller
class MyController #Autowired()(val myServices: MyServices) extends Controller
To enable Spring for controllers, you have to define a Global object, as the Play! documentation explains:
object Global extends GlobalSettings {
val context = new ClassPathXmlApplicationContext("application-context.xml")
override def getControllerInstance[A](controllerClass: Class[A]): A = {
context.getBean(controllerClass)
}
}
My unit test doesn't need Spring; I just pass collaborators (mocks) to constructor.
However, concerning the rendered template, I test only for the type of result (Ok, BadRequest, Redirection etc...).
Indeed, I noticed it's not easy at all to make my test scan the whole rendered template in details (parameters sent to it etc..), with only unit testing.
Thus, in order to assert that the right template is called with the right arguments, I trust my acceptance tests running Selenium, or a possible functional test, if you prefer, to scan for the whole expected result.
2 - The return values from the services are passed to the correct
attributes of the template
It's pretty easy to check for that..How? By trusting compiler! Prefer to pass some custom types to your template instead of simple primitives for instance:
phone: String would become: phone: Phone. (a simple value object).
Therefore, no fear to pass the attributes in a non-expected order to your template (in unit test or real production code). Compiler indeed will warn.
Here's an example of one of my unit test (simplified) using specs2:
(You will note the use of a wrapper: WithFreshMocks).
This case class would allow to refresh all variables (mocks in this case) test after test.
Thus a good way to reset mocks.
class MyControllerSpec extends Specification with Mockito {
def is =
"listAllCars should retrieve all cars" ! WithFreshMocks().listAllCarsShouldRetrieveAllCars
case class WithFreshMocks() {
val myServicesMock = mock[MyServices]
val myController = new MyController(myServicesMock)
def listAllCarsShouldRetrieveAllCars = {
val FakeGetRequest = FakeRequest() //fakeRequest needed by controller
mockListAllCarsAsReturningSomeCars()
val result = myController.listAllCars(FakeGetRequest).asInstanceOf[PlainResult] //passing fakeRequest to simulate a true request
assertOkResult(result).
and(there was one(myServicesMock).listAllCars()) //verify that there is one and only one call of listAllCars. If listAllCars would take any parameters that you expected to be called, you could have precise them.
}
private def mockListAllCarsAsReturningSomeCars() {
myServicesMock.listAllCars() returns List[Cars](Car("ferrari"), Car("porsche"))
}
private def assertOkResult(result: PlainResult) = result.header.status must_== 200
}
So, I came up with a cake pattern and mockito based solution:
given the service:
trait Service {
def indexMessage : String
}
trait ServiceImpl {
def indexMessage = {
"Hello world"
}
}
Then the controller looks like:
object Application extends ApplicationController
with ServiceImpl {
def template = views.html.index.apply
}
trait ApplicationController extends Controller
with Service {
def template: (String) => play.api.templates.Html
def index = Action {
Ok(template("controller got:" + indexMessage))
}
}
And the test looks like:
class ApplicationControllerSpec extends Specification with Mockito {
"cake ApplicationController" should {
"return OK with the results of the service invocation" in {
val expectedMessage = "Test Message"
val m = mock[(String) => play.api.templates.Html]
object ApplicationControllerSpec extends ApplicationController {
def indexMessage = expectedMessage
def template = m
}
val response = ApplicationControllerSpec.index(FakeRequest())
status(response) must equalTo(OK)
there was one(m).apply(Matchers.eq("controller got:" + expectedMessage))
}
}
}
I had a lot of trouble getting Mockito working.
It requires an extra dependency and I had a lot of trouble working out how to use the matchers in scala (I'm quite comfortable using it in java)
Ultimately I think the above answer is better, avoid using String and other primitive types where you can wrap them in task specific types, then you get compiler warnings.
Also I would generally avoid doing things like the "controller got:" prefixing in the controller.
It's there in this case so I can verify that it went through, in the real world that should be done by some other component (controllers are just for plumbing IMO)
I'm writing a Spock Spec (unit test) for a Service in Grails 1.3.5, and I've run across the following error:
No signature of method: myapp.Thing.findAll() is applicable for argument types: (java.util.LinkedHashMap) values: [[sort:index, order:asc]] Possible solutions: findAll(), findAll(groovy.lang.Closure), find(groovy.lang.Closure), getAll(java.util.List), getAll([Ljava.lang.Object;)
groovy.lang.MissingMethodException: No signature of method: myapp.Thing.findAll() is applicable for argument types: (java.util.LinkedHashMap) values: [[sort:index, order:asc]]
Possible solutions: findAll(), findAll(groovy.lang.Closure), find(groovy.lang.Closure), getAll(java.util.List), getAll([Ljava.lang.Object;)
at grails.test.MockUtils.addDynamicFinders_closure56(MockUtils.groovy:641)
at myapp.MyService.getCards(MyService.groovy:8)
at myapp.MyServiceSpec.getCards returns empty map if no cards or statuses are available(MyServiceSpec.groovy:13)
Previously this test passed, but the failure occurred when I modified my Service to include sorting of results in the getThings() method.
class MyService {
static transactional = true
static getThings() {
Thing.findAll(sort: 'index', order: 'asc')
}
}
This still appears to work when the application is run, so I suspect it's a limitation of the implementation of mockDomain().
class MyServiceSpec extends UnitSpec {
def 'mockDomain has some limits, i suspect'() {
given:
mockDomain(Thing)
def myService = new MyService()
when:
myService.getThings()
then:
true
}
}
So my question is are their differences in the methods added to a domain class using mockDomain() as opposed to using the real domain class at runtime? If so, what are they?
sort and order are Hibernate criteria parameters, they won't work with MockDomain() - it doesn't involve Hibernate. Luckily.
You can mock that findAll() signature yourself, using instances array - the second parameter of MockDomain(), (EDIT) like, this overrides findAll(Map) signature of Thing:
List<Thing> thingInstances = []
void setUp() {
mockDomain(Thing, thingInstances)
Thing.metaClass.`static`.findAll = { Map m ->
def result = thingInstances.sort{ it."${m.order}" }
m.order == 'asc' ? result : result.reverse()
}
}
(EDIT end)
Or you can make it integration test, then it will run for ages. Which I don't recommend.
There is a new approach for mocking domain objects: http://grails.1312388.n4.nabble.com/New-approach-to-mocking-domain-classes-in-Grails-unit-tests-td2529895.html. Maybe this helps you out here.
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.