I have class that has 3 methods: insert, update and delete from the db.
In order to test it in the insert test method I need to use the insert method and after I insert i need to delete what I inserted, but in order to delete I should use the delete method that I also want to test so it didn't make sense to me that I need to use them and also test them.
I hope you understand my problem. Thanks in advance!
You must decide what you want to test. That was you describe, it is an integration test. By a “real” unitTest, you test only your method, and not the System method and not the database.
If you want a unitTest, you have several options. For Example, you work with interfaces and catch your statement before it comes to the database.
Edit 1 - one possibility to implement unit test with interfaces:
You need one interface that implements the method these go to the backend system:
public interface IDatabase{
public returnValue insert(yourParam);
public int update(yourParam);
}
Then you implement your method with the real functions in a class:
public class Database implements IDatabase {
#Override
public returnValue insert(yourParam) {
// do something
return null;
}
#Override
public int update(yourParam){
// do something
return 0;
}
}
This class you call in the main class:
/**
* The real class to do what you want to do.
*/
public class RealClass {
private IDatabase dbInstance = null;
private IDatabase getDbInstance() {
if (dbInstance == null) {
dbInstance = new Database();
}
return dbInstance;
}
protected void setDbInstance(IDatabase dataBase) {
dbInstance = dataBase;
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
getDbInstance().insert(yourParam);
}
}
For the unit test you implement the interface again:
public class UnitTest implements IDatabase {
#Override
public returnValue insert(yourParam) {
// Here can you test your statement and manipulate the return value
return null;
}
#Override
public int update(yourParam){
if (yourParam.containsValue(value1)) {
assertEquals("yourStatement", yourParam);
return 1;
}else if (yourParam.containsValue(value2)) {
assertEquals("yourStatement2", yourParam);
return 5;
}else{
assertTrue(false,"unknown Statement")
}
}
#Test
public void yourTest(){
RealClass.setDbInstance(this);
//Test something
}
}
This is time-consuming to implement, but with this, you are independent from the backend system and you can call the unittest every time without a database.
By default, the order of test methods is not warrantied in JUnit. Nevertheless, as of JUnit 4.11, you can order by the test name, as follows:
import org.junit.FixMethodOrder;
import org.junit.Test;
import org.junit.runners.MethodSorters;
#FixMethodOrder(MethodSorters.NAME_ASCENDING)
public class Test1 {
#Test
public void aInsert() {
System.out.println("first INSERT");
}
#Test
public void bUpdate() throws Exception {
System.out.println("second UPDATE");
}
#Test
public void cDelete() throws Exception {
System.out.println("third DELETE");
}
}
Related
Hello Every One I Have This Method Which it Checks if the Input String Is Numbers only And Its Return True Or False
I Want To Make A Junit Test For this method and Actually I Don't know how to test Method Like This Can Any One Help And Thank You All.
My Method:
private Boolean Check_Ean(String EAN_Ch)
{
Long EAN;
try
{
EAN = Long.parseLong(EAN_Ch);
return true;
}
catch (NumberFormatException e)
{
return false;
}
}
First you need to create a class in the test folder(located at the same path as main). Then you need to use their annotations to or either Prepare the information, Test and Destroy the information(usefull when you have DB connection opens or streams):
public class TestClass {
#Before
public void setup() {
//prepare information
}
#Test
public void testCheck_Ean() {
boolean result = Check_Ean(...);
Assert.assertTrue(result);
}
#After
public void destroy() {
//if you need to "destroy" some info
}
}
tester = new CLASS_NAME();
assertTrue(tester.Check_Ean("5");
assertFalse(tester.Check_Ean("this is noot a Long");
You might be overthinking it. Also the Check_Ean method maybe could be static if you pass the Ean as a parameter rather than getting a class variable.
I'm having trouble understanding why all those processors pass the test but Behavior does not:
package com.example;
import org.junit.Test;
import io.reactivex.Flowable;
import io.reactivex.processors.*;
public class ProcessorTest {
private static Flowable<String> justFoo() {
return Flowable.just("foo");
}
private static FlowableProcessor<String> subscribeToFoo(
FlowableProcessor<String> processor) {
justFoo().subscribe(processor);
return processor;
}
#Test public void flowable() { // pass
justFoo().test().assertValue("foo");
}
#Test public void async() { // pass
subscribeToFoo(AsyncProcessor.create()).test().assertValue("foo");
}
#Test public void replay() { // pass
subscribeToFoo(ReplayProcessor.create()).test().assertValue("foo");
}
#Test public void unicast() { // pass
subscribeToFoo(UnicastProcessor.create()).test().assertValue("foo");
}
#Test public void behaviorFail() { // fail
subscribeToFoo(BehaviorProcessor.create()).test().assertValue("foo");
}
#Test public void behaviorPassing() { // pass
subscribeToFoo(BehaviorProcessor.create())
.test()
.assertNoValues()
.assertSubscribed()
.assertComplete()
.assertNoErrors()
.assertNoTimeout()
.assertTerminated();
}
}
The docs say that BehaviorProcessor is a:
Processor that emits the most recent item it has observed and all subsequent observed items to each subscribed Subscriber.
So in my understanding it should pass the behaviorFail test, not the behaviorPassing. How come is that?
How would I write a valid test, to know that a BehaviorProcessor emitted a certain value?
Getting rid of the terminal event passed to the processor would help:
#Test public void behavior() {
final BehaviorProcessor<String> processor = BehaviorProcessor.create();
justFoo().concatWith(Flowable.never()).subscribe(processor);
processor.test().assertValue("foo");
}
I have the following test set up. I don't understand how the test is passing successfully since the user is set to "Dummy."
#RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class)
public class TodoServiceAbstractImplTest
{
#InjectMocks
TodoServiceAbstractImpl todoServiceAbstractImpl = new TodoServiceAbstractImpl();
#Mock
SomeRandomClass someRandomClass;
#Mock
TodoServiceAbstract todoServiceAbstract;
#Test
public void testRetrieveTodo_usingAMock(){
todoServiceAbstractImpl.setUser("Dummy"); //Set the user to be "Dummy" already
assertEquals(null,todoServiceAbstractImpl.getUser()); //Why is the user is still null?
}
}
Here are the relevant classes. I created them to test Mockito as I am still learning testing in Spring Boot.
Definition of the SomeRandomClass:
public class SomeRandomClass{
private String field;
public SomeRandomClass(){
}
public SomeRandomClass(String field){
setRandom(field);
}
public void setRandom(String field){
this.field = field;
}
public String getRandom(){
return field;
}
}
Definition of the Abstract class:
public abstract class TodoServiceAbstract {
#Autowired
private SomeRandomClass RandomUser;
public TodoServiceAbstract(){
//RandomUser = new SomeRandomClass();
}
public void setUser(String user){
this.RandomUser.setRandom(user);
}
public String getUser(){
return RandomUser.getRandom();
}
public abstract List<String> retrieveTodos(String user);
}
Definition of the Abstract Implementation
public class TodoServiceAbstractImpl extends TodoServiceAbstract{
public List<String> retrieveTodos(String user){
if(user == getUser()){
return Arrays.asList("item 1", "item 2",
"item 3");
}
return Arrays.asList("Random item");
}
}
Tom answered in the comments:
Why do you expect something else than null? SomeRandomClass is mocked so it obviously doesn't actually set anything when calling setUser. And why should it? That's the point of a mock.
Remember that mocked implementations are not real, and in particular unstubbed calls will return dummy values such as null, 0, or an empty string.
In addition to what Tom already said in the comments, this test is testing your mocks, rather than your actual implementation. Since you mocked SomeRandomClass, your tests should verify if that method is being called. In this case you should test if SomeRandomClass.setRandom() is called when you call setUser() and likewise, you should test if SomeRandomClass.getRandom() is called when you call getUser().
For example:
#Test
public void getUser_shouldUseGetRandom() {
when(someRandomClass.getRandom()).thenReturn("data");
assertEquals("data", todoServiceAbstractImpl.getUser());
}
To test setUser() you can do something like:
#Test
public void setUser_shouldUseSetRandom() {
todoServiceAbstractImpl.setUser("data");
verify(someRandomClass).setRandom("data");
}
By mocking/stubbing you can write proper unit tests for TodoServiceAbstractImpl without having to take the behaviour of SomeRandomClass.
I'm just getting into testing of code. I have done unit tests before but haven't really isolated them. So they were more like integration test (indirectly). I want to give Mockito a try and I have added it to my Intellij IDE.
But I have no idea of how to actually implement mocking at all. There are examples on their website but I just can't wrap my head around the concept of mocking. I know that one uses mocking to isolate the unit testing to ensure that the errors are in the unit itself and not in a dependency.
I wrote the following:
#Test
public void testChangeMemberReturnsTrue() throws Exception {
Member tempMem = new Member();
tempMem.setMemberFirstName("Swagrid");
tempMem.setMemberLastName("McLovin");
tempMem.setMemberID("SM666");
SQLDUMMY.saveMember(tempMem); //Save member to dummy DB.
Member checkMem = new Member();
ArrayList<Member> memArr = SQLDUMMY.getAllMembers();
for (Member m : memArr) { // Look through all saved members
if (m.equals(tempMem)) { // If match, save to checkMem
checkMem = m;
}
}
assertTrue(tempMem.equals(checkMem)); // Make sure they are really equal.
String newfirstname = "Darius";
String newlastname = "DunkMaster";
assertTrue(memhandling.changeMember(tempMem, newfirstname, newlastname));
}
And here is the actual method:
public boolean changeMember(Member mem, String n1, String n2) {
try {
ArrayList<Member> memArr = SQLDUMMY.getAllMembers();
for (Member m : memArr) {
if (m.equals(mem)) {
m.setMemberFirstName(n1);
m.setMemberLastName(n2);
m.setMemberID(ensureUniqueID(m, m.getMemberID())); //Just a method call to another method in the same class to ensure ID uniqueness.
return true;
}
else {
return false;
}
}
}
catch (Exception e) {
System.out.println("Error4.");
}
return false;
}
I'd like to mock the SQLDUMMY (Which I created just to see if my tests would pass at all, which they do.) The SQLDUMMY class looks like this:
public class SQLDUMMY {
private static ArrayList<Member> memberList = new ArrayList<>();
private static ArrayList<Ship> shipList = new ArrayList<>();
public static ArrayList<Member> getAllMembers() {
return memberList;
}
public static void saveMember(Member m) {
memberList.add(m);
}
public static void deleteMember(Member memIn) {
memberList.remove(memIn);
}
public static void saveShip(Ship newShip) {
shipList.add(newShip);
}
public static ArrayList<Ship> getAllShips() {
return shipList;
}
public static void deleteShip(Ship s) {
shipList.remove(s);
}
}
It basically just consists of getters and add/remove for the ArrayLists that act as a contemporary DB storage.
Summary: How can I mock the SQLDUMMY class (DAO), so it is no longer a dependency for the Unit tests?
You need to read on how Mockito works.
The basic idea is that it extends you class and and overrides all methods and allows you to return what ever you want it too.
Syntax is :
SQLDummy sqlDummy = Mockito.mock(SQLDummy.class);
Mockito.when(sqlDummy.getAllShips()).thenReturn(new ArrayList< Ship >())
My application have several execution modes, and in 1 mode it is normal that some of my tests will throw a concrete exception. I need to annotate this methods with something like #SkipOnFail that will set method as skipped if exception was thrown.
thanks in advance!
#Edit(for my question to be more clear)
#Test(expected=ConcreteException.class)
does not work for me because i need my tests to pass even if ConcreteException.class was not thrown(expected tag in junit will mark my test as failed if this exception won't be thrown), and to be skipped otherwise. In all other cases it should work as always.
#Solution that worked for me(junit v4.7) thx to #axtavt
#Rule
public MethodRule skipRule = new MethodRule() {
public Statement apply(final Statement base, FrameworkMethod method, Object target) {
if(method.getAnnotation(SkipOnFail.class) == null) return base;
return new Statement() {
#Override
public void evaluate() throws Throwable {
try{
base.evaluate();
} catch (ConcreteException e) {
Assume.assumeTrue(false);
}
}
};
}
};
#Thx
I don't think that such a feature is available out of the box, but it should be pretty easy to implement with custom TestRule and Assume, something like this:
#Rule
public TestRule skipRule = new TestRule() {
public Statement apply(final Statement base, Description desc) {
if (desc.getAnnotation(SkipOnFail.class) == null) return base;
return new Statement() {
public void evaluate() throws Throwable {
try {
base.evaluate();
} catch (MyExceptoion ex) {
Assume.assumeTrue(false);
}
}
};
}
};
What about using JUnit Extensions?
The following example is taken from their Tutorial.
It provides aditional annotations for Prerequisites (#Prerequisite): Ignore tests based on conditions.
The required approach would be to check this during running tests. So you can simply add a #Prerequisite(requires="") annotation.
public class TestFillDatabase {
#Prerequisite(requires = "databaseIsAvailable")
#Test public void fillData() {
// ...
}
public boolean databaseIsAvailable() {
boolean isAvailable = ...;
return isAvailable;
}
}
public class TestFillDatabase {
#Prerequisite(requires = "databaseIsAvailable")
#Test public void fillData() {
// ...
}
public boolean databaseIsAvailable() {
boolean isAvailable = ...;
return isAvailable ;
}
}
This specified methods with #Prerequisite(requires = "databaseIsAvailable") must be a public method, returning a boolean or Boolean value.
If these methods will be consolidated in helper classes, you can also specify static methods within a class to be called using #Prerequisite(requires = "databaseIsAvailable", callee="DBHelper").
public class TestFillDatabase {
#Prerequisite(requires = "databaseIsAvailable", callee="DBHelper")
#Test public void fillData() {
// ...
}
}
public class DBHelper {
public static boolean databaseIsAvailable() {
boolean isAvailable = ...;
return isAvailable ;
}
}
Also using the Assume class (since jUnit 4.4), you can use assumeNoException():
try{
base.evaluate();
} catch (ConcreteException e) {
Assume.assumeNoException("Concrete exception: skipping test", e);
}
I searched for the docs about JUnit and it appears that from version 4.9 they have introduced what they call test rules (see TestRule). You may start from this.
The ExpectedException class marked as #Rule could be of some help in order to check for exceptions thrown but not mandatory for the test to pass.
For more advanced usage I cannot say for the moment as I've just discovered it.