Develop Reference

how to mock a private method under a injectmocks annotated class in java

I meet a question about the mock private method in a injected mock annotated class. My code is like following
public class foo {
#Autowired
fooBean fooBean;
public void method1() {
this.method2();
}
private void method2() {
fooBean.someMethod();
system.out.println("Hello world");
}
}
when I create a UT class with powermockito, the foo class should be #injectMocks, since the fooBean should be injected as mock class. But when foo class is marked as #injectMocks, it can't be mock its private method using like "doReturn("xxx").when(foo,"method2")", it will raise error about this can not be applied to injectMocks.
It is blocked. Don't know how to continue.

TLDR; you cannot use InjectMocks to mock a private method.
You should mock out implementation details and focus on the expected behaviour of the application. It is important as well that the private methods are not doing core testing logic in your java project.
Focus on writing functions such that the testing is not hindered by the private method. If it is not possible, it is worth asking what is the private method doing that is so valuable to your function and why it has to be private.
There are other ways to test private methods - You could use the Reflections java library, this would let you stop methods at runtime and inject specific values into them. But, again, this is finding a solution to a problem that does not need to exist.

How to mock Message.creator(to, from, smsRequest.getMessage()).create(); method in Twilio

I have used twilio to send sms to my users using Java 8 and Spring. So I want Unit test my code using JUnit5 and Mockito. But the issue is that I am unable to mock this code
Message.creator(to, from, smsRequest.getMessage()).create();
So I would require help in successfully mocking this code for properly Unit testing my function.
Any help is appreciated.

You need to introduce an interface or abstract class between the twilio concrete implementation of Message.creator and your code that is using it. By doing so you can use standard mocking frameworks like mockito to create the mocks for you. And in the production setup you will inject code that uses the real implementation. For this you can use standard IOC tools, or go with constructor injection.

Message.creator(to, from, smsRequest.getMessage()).create();
returns a MessageCreator class, which actually does the job of sending the message.
Let's say your class has a method named sendMessage which calls
Message.creator(...).create().
Then, create a class that extends the actual class and overrides the sendMessage. In this way, you can quickly put the mock of MessageCreator class.
...
import com.twilio.rest.api.v2010.account
...
#Test
void testMockCreateOfTwilio() {
//given
messageCreator = mock(MessageCreator.class);
MyClassUnderTest underTest = new MyClassUnderTest();
underTest.setMessageCreator(messageCreator);
//when
//For example You can throw an exception with your mock
when(messageCreator.create()).thenThrow(ApiException.class);
underTest.sendMessage(new SomerParams);
//then
....
}
class MyClassUnderTest extends MyActualClass {
MessageCreator messageCreator;
public Message sendMessage(SomeParams params) {
return this.messageCreator.create();
}
public void setMessageCreator(MessageCreator messageCreator) {
this.messageCreator = messageCreator;
}
}

Mocking an abstract class and injecting classes with Mockito annotations?

Is it possible to both mock an abstract class and inject it with mocked classes using Mockito annotations. I now have the following situation:
#Mock private MockClassA mockClassA;
#Mock private MockClassB mockClassB;
#Mock(answer = Answers.CALLS_REAL_METHODS) private AbstractClassUnderTest abstractClassUnderTest;
#Before
public void init() {
MockitoAnnotations.initMocks(this);
Whitebox.setInternalState(abstractClassUnderTest, mockClassA);
Whitebox.setInternalState(abstractClassUnderTest, mockClassB);
}
I'd like to use something like #InjectMocks on AbstractClassUnderTest but it can't be used in combination with #Mock. The current situation, with Whitebox from Powermock, works but I'm curious if it's possible to solve it with just annotations. I couldn't find any solutions or examples.
(I know about the objections to test abstract classes and I'd personally rather test a concrete implementation and just use #InjectMocks.)

I am not aware of any way to go about this, for one clear reason: #InjectMocks is meant for non-mocked systems under test, and #Mock is meant for mocked collaborators, and Mockito is not designed for any class to fill both those roles in the same test.
Bear in mind that your #Mock(CALLS_REAL_METHODS) declaration is inherently dangerous: You're testing your AbstractClassUnderTest, but you are not running any constructors or initializing any fields. I don't think you can expect a test with this design to be realistic or robust, no matter what annotations can or cannot do for you. (Personally, I was previously in favor of real partial mocks of abstract classes as a "tool in the toolbox", but I'm coming around to thinking they're too far removed from reality to be useful.)
Were I in your position, I would create a small override implementation for testing:
#RunWith(JUnit4.class) public class AbstractClassTest {
/** Minimial AbstractClass implementation for testing. */
public static class SimpleConcreteClass extends AbstractClass {
public SimpleConcreteClass() { super("foo", "bar", 42); }
#Override public void abstractMethod1() {}
#Override public String abstractMethod2(int parameter) { return ""; }
}
#InjectMocks SimpleConcreteClass classUnderTest;
#Mock mockClassA;
#Mock mockClassB;
}
At this point, you have a simple and predictable AbstractClass implementation, which you can use even without a mocking framework if you just wanted to test that AbstractClass has the same API for extension that it did before. (This is an often-overlooked test for abstract classes.) You can even extract this, as it may be useful for other testing: Should you want to override the abstract behavior for a single test class, you can create an anonymous inner class with just a single method override, or you can set classUnderTest = spy(classUnderTest); to set up Mockito proxying and the behavior you want.
(Bear in mind that #InjectMocks and #Spy can't be used reliably together, as documented in this GitHub issue and the Google Code and mailing list threads to which it links.)

I found some trick with mocking field before initialization.
#InjectMocks
private AbstractClass abstractClass;
#Mock
private MockClass mockClass;
#Before
public void init() {
abstractClass= mock(AbstractClass.class, Answers.CALLS_REAL_METHODS);
MockitoAnnotations.initMocks(this);
}
Maybe it'll help someone.

Why Cannot I use Mock and InjectMocks together?

valid construction:
#InjectMocks
SomeClass sc = mock(SomeClass.class);
Invalid construction:
#InjectMocks
#Mock
SomeClass sc;
I want to inject mocks to another mock. I want to use only annotation style.
Why was in Mockito forbid second construction ?
Update
example:
public class ArrTest {
private SomeClass someClass;
public List<String> foo(){
anotherMethod(); // I suppose that this method works. I want to test it separately.
//logic which I need to test
return someClass.doSmth();// I suppose that this method works. I want to test it separately.
}
public void anotherMethod(){
///...
}
}
public class SomeClass {
public List<String> doSmth(){
return null;
}
}
test:
public class ArrTestTest {
#InjectMocks
ArrTest arrTest = Mockito.mock(ArrTest.class);
#Mock
SomeClass someClass;
#Test
public void fooTest(){
Mockito.when(someClass.doSmth()).thenReturn(new ArrayList<String>());
Mockito.doNothing().when(arrTest).anotherMethod();
System.out.println(arrTest.foo());
}
}

It sounds like you're trying to do something that doesn't really make sense. You shouldn't need to inject any dependencies into your mock since mocks by definition don't have any behaviour until you define it with when(mock.someMethod()).thenAnswer() or some variation.
(except perhaps if you're using a spy(), but you've specifically said you're using a #Mock).
Maybe you could explain your use case and why you're trying to inject dependencies into a mock?

#InjectMocks specifically indicates that the annotated field will NOT contain a mock. Annotating #InjectMocks #Mock is not just unsupported—it's contradictory.
To return stubs wherever possible, use this:
#Mock(answer=Answers.RETURNS_DEEP_STUBS)
YourClass mockYourClassWithDeepStubs;
But heed the official documentation for this Answer:
WARNING: This feature should rarely be required for regular clean code! Leave it for legacy code. Mocking a mock to return a mock, to return a mock, (...), to return something meaningful hints at violation of Law of Demeter or mocking a value object (a well known anti-pattern).
Good quote I've seen one day on the web: every time a mock returns a mock a fairy dies.

A mock doesn't have any real implementation. #InjectMocks would try to find and call setters for whatever mock objects have already been created and pass them in. Mockito "knows" that this is kinda pointless on a mock, since there won't be any way to get the mock objects back out, much less do anything meaningful with them.

Mockito - deep stubbing

I am using Mockito to test my classes. I am trying to use Deep stubbing as I didn't a way on injecting a Mock inside another mock object in Mockito.
class MyService{
#Resource
SomeHelper somehelper;
public void create()
{
//....
somehelper.invokeMeth(t);
}
}
class SomeHelper{
#Resource
private WebServiceTemplate webServiceTemplate;
public void invokeMeth(T t)
{
try{
//...
webServiceTemplate.marshalSendAndReceive(t);
}catch (final WebServiceIOException e) {
throw new MyAppException("Service not running");
}
}
}
Now I am trying to Unit test the MyService class's create() method.
I have injected a mock for SomeHelper as follows
#Mock(answer = Answers.RETURNS_DEEP_STUBS)
SomeHelper somehelper;
What I want now is when the invokeMeth() method gets called on the mocked somehelper object it calls the real method in this case.
when(somehelper.invokeMeth(isA(RequestObject.class)))
.thenCallRealMethod();
I was expecting the webServiceTemplate not be null in this case.
However I get a Nullpointer exception when the code tries to execute the line
webServiceTemplate.marshalSendAndReceive(t);
Any clue how I can get access to a deep mock object (i.e. mock within a mock - in this case webserviceTemplete mock inside somehelper mock) and then apply a when condition to throw a WebserviceIOException ?
I want this so that I can test the MyService.create() to check it behaves properly when a WebServiceIOException is thrown down the code.

Yes of course, you are mixing real objects and mocks. Plus using the thenCallRealMethod lloks like a partial mock, it feels wrong here, it's no wonder the javadoc of this method talks about that as well.
I definatelty should stress you than, design wise, having a mock that returns a mock is often a smell. More precisely you are breaking the Demeter Law, or not following the Tell, Don't Ask principle.
Any looking at your code I don't why the code would need to mock WebServiceTemplate. You want to unit test MyService, and I don't see a relationship to WebServiceTemplate. Instead you should focus on the interactions with you helper only. And unit test SomeHelper separately where you'll be able to check the interactions between SomeHelper and WebServiceTemplate.
Here's a little example of how I see the thing:
public void ensure_helper_is_used_to_invoke_a_RequestObject() {
// given a service that has an helper collaborator
... other fixture if necessary
// when
myService.behaviorToTest();
// then
verify(someHelperMock).invokeMeth(isA(RequestObject.class));
}
How those that look for your real use case ?
Hope that helps