How to initialize test classes from test suite? - java

I'm having a test class, which runs test methods based on static data.
public SampleTest {
public static int static_data;
#test
public static test() {
// Test logic using static_data
}
}
this static data i want to pass it from testsuite.
My test suite looks like this,
#RunWith(Suite.class)
#Suite.SuiteClasses({SampleTest.class, SampleTest.class})
public class SampleTestSuite {
}
Before calling SampleTest, each time i want to pass a different sample_data,
So based on that, different logic can be tested.
I tried with #beforeclass in testSuite, but it's calling only once.
Is there any annotation, which will be called before calling eatch test class.So I can pass a different value ?

Related

How is it possible to initialize the Junit5 Mocks annotated with #Mock before each test using MockitoExtension?

I would like to create some Junit test using the annotation #Mock and MockitoExtension.
Something like this:
#ExtendWith(MockitoExtension.class)
public class Test {
#Mock
MyObject mock;
#Test
public void test1() {
..
}
#Test
public void test2() {
..
}
How can I tell to MockitoExtension that it has to create the mock before each test execution to isolate them?
I would like to avoid that the first executed test defining a behavior for the mock with when(mock.doSomething()).then(returnSomething()) will not influence the other tests by resetting the mock)
It's not just Mockito that is reinitialized, it's standard JUnit behavior. A new instance of your Test class is created for each method. So this creates isolation between each test for anything you set up as instance members, including Mockito instances.
You can imagine your test is run like this:
Test instance1 = new Test();
instance1.test1();
Test instance2 = new Test();
instance2.test2();
You can set behavior for each instance using #BeforeEach:
#BeforeEach
void setUp() {
// this runs for every test method on a brand new scope
}
notice how it is an instance method.
If you do want "global" behavior, you use static methods and variables instead. The corresponding annotations are #BeforeAll/#AfterAll which must be applied to static methods and runs once each for the whole class.

blend parameterized and programmatic unit tests

With JUnit you can use #RunWith(Parameterized.class) to provide a set of parameters to pass to the test constructor and then run tests with each object.
I'm trying to move as much test logic as possible into data, but there are some tests that won't easily be converted into data-driven tests. Is there a way to use JUnit's Parameterized runner to run some tests with parameters, and then also add non-data-driven tests that aren't run repeatedly for each test object construction?
My workaround for this was to create a single class and place the programmatic and data-driven tests in two separate sub-classes. A sub-class must be static for JUnit to run its tests. Here's a skeleton:
#RunWith(Enclosed.class) // needed for working well with Ant
public class MyClassTests {
public static class Programmatic {
#Test
public void myTest(){
// test something here
}
}
#RunWith(Parameterized.class)
public static class DataDriven {
#Parameters
public static Collection<Object[]> getParams() {
return Collections.emptyList();
}
private String data;
public DataDriven(String testName, String data){
this.data = data;
}
#Test
public void test() throws AnalyzeExceptionEN{
// test data string here
}
}
}
one way is to use Junit's Enclosed runner. it's very verbose but also pretty powerful. it allows you to combine multiple different runners in one file.
other option is to use custom junit runner. for sure zohhak supports tests with parameters and without. small extract:
#RunWith(ZohhakRunner.class)
public class CoercingTest {
#TestWith("ONE_OF_ENUM_VALUES")
public void should_coerce_enum(SampleEnum param) {
assertThat(param).isEqualTo(SampleEnum.ONE_OF_ENUM_VALUES);
}
#Test
public void should_run_standard_junit_test() {
//this will also work
}
}
if it's not enough for you, for sure you can find other runners that support both kind of tests.

JUNIT : run setup only once for a large number of test classes

I have a class, which I use as a basis for my unit tests. In this class I initialize the whole environment for my tests, setting up database mappings, enter a number of database records across multiple tables, etc. That class has a method with a #BeforeClass annotation which does the initialization. Next thing, I extend that class with specific classes in which I have #Test methods.
My question is, since the before class is exactly the same for all these test classes, how can I ensure that they are run only once for all the tests.
One simple solution is that I could keep all the tests in one class. However, the number of tests is huge, also they are categorised based on functional heads. So they are located in different classes. However since they need the exact same setup, they inherit the #BeforeClass. As a result the whole setup is done at least once per test class, taking much more time in total than I would prefer.
I could, though, put them all in various subpackages under one package, hence if there is a way, how I can run set up once for all the tests within that package, it would be great.
With JUnit4 test suite you can do something like this :
#RunWith(Suite.class)
#Suite.SuiteClasses({ Test1IT.class, Test2IT.class })
public class IntegrationTestSuite
{
#BeforeClass
public static void setUp()
{
System.out.println("Runs before all tests in the annotation above.");
}
#AfterClass
public static void tearDown()
{
System.out.println("Runs after all tests in the annotation above.");
}
}
Then you run this class as you would run a normal test class and it will run all of your tests.
JUnit doesn't support this, you will have to use the standard Java work-arounds for singletons: Move the common setup code into a static code block and then call an empty method in this class:
static {
...init code here...
}
public static void init() {} // Empty method to trigger the execution of the block above
Make sure that all tests call init(), for example my putting it into a #BeforeClass method. Or put the static code block into a shared base class.
Alternatively, use a global variable:
private static boolean initialize = true;
public static void init() {
if(!initialize) return;
initialize = false;
...init code here...
}
Create one base class for all tests:
public class BaseTest {
static{
/*** init code here ***/
}
}
and every test should inherit from it:
public class SomeTest extends BaseTest {
}
You can make one BaseTest class with a #BeforeClass method, then have all the other tests inherit from it. This way, when each test object is constructed, #BeforeClass gets executed.
Also avoid executing it just once for all the test suite, since all the test cases should be independent. #BeforeClass should execute only once each test case, not test suite.
If you can tolerate adding spring-test to your project, or you are using it already, then a good approach is to use the technique described here: How to load DBUnit test data once per case with Spring Test
Not sure if anyone still is using JUnit and trying to fix it without using Spring Runner (aka no spring integration). TestNG has this feature. But here is a JUnit based solution.
Create a RunOnce per thread operation like so. This maintains a list of classes for which the operation has run.
public class RunOnceOperation {
private static final ThreadLocal t = new ThreadLocal();
public void run(Function f) {
if (t.get() == null) {
t.set(Arrays.asList(getClass()));
f.apply(0);
} else {
if (!((List) t.get()).contains(getClass())) {
((List) t.get()).add(getClass());
f.apply(0);
}
}
}
}
Back in your unit test
#Before
public beforeTest() {
operation.run(new Function<Integer, Void>() {
#Override
public Void apply(Integer t) {
checkBeanProperties();
return null;
}
});
}
private void checkBeanProperties() {
//I only want to check this once per class.
//Also my bean check needs instance of the class and can't be static.
}
My function interface is like this:
interface Function<I,O> {
O apply(I i);
}
When you use this way, you can perform operations once per class using ThreadLocal.

How to mock static method in Java?

I have a class FileGenerator, and I'm writing a test for the generateFile() method that should do the following:
1) it should call the static method getBlockImpl(FileTypeEnum) on BlockAbstractFactory
2) it should populate variable blockList from the subclass method getBlocks()
3) it should call a static method createFile from a final helper class FileHelper passing a String parameter
4) it should call the run method of each BlockController in the blockList
So far, I have this empty method:
public class FileGenerator {
// private fields with Getters and Setters
public void generateBlocks() {
}
}
I am using JUnit, Mockito to mock objects and I've tried using PowerMockito to mock static and final classes (which Mockito doesn't do).
My problem is: my first test (calling method getBlockList() from BlockAbstractFactory) is passing, even though there is no implementation in generateBlocks(). I have implemented the static method in BlockAbstractFactory (returning null, so far), to avoid Eclipse syntax errors.
How can I test if the static method is called within fileGerator.generateBlocks()?
Here's my Test Class, so far:
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
public class testFileGenerator {
FileGenerator fileGenerator = new FileGenerator();
#Test
public void shouldCallGetBlockList() {
fileGenerator.setFileType(FileTypeEnum.SPED_FISCAL);
fileGenerator.generateBlocks();
PowerMockito.mockStatic(BlockAbstractFactory.class);
PowerMockito.verifyStatic();
BlockAbstractFactory.getBlockImpl(fileGenerator.getFileType());
}
}
I have no experience with PowerMock, but since you didn't get an answer yet I'm just been reading through the documentation to see if I can help you a bit on your way.
I found that you need to prepare PowerMock so that I knows which static methods it needs to prepare to be mocked. Like so:
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest(BlockAbstractFactory.class) // <<=== Like that
public class testFileGenerator {
// rest of you class
}
Here you can find more information.
Does that help?
Working example:
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest({ClassStaticA.class, ClassStaticB.class})
public class ClassStaticMethodsTest {
#Test
public void testMockStaticMethod() {
PowerMock.mockStatic(ClassStaticA.class);
EasyMock.expect(ClassStaticA.getMessageStaticMethod()).andReturn("mocked message");
PowerMock.replay(ClassStaticA.class);
assertEquals("mocked message", ClassStaticA.getMessageStaticMethod());
}

TestNG test inheritance and groups

We have DAO tests that should run against both the real DAO/database, and against a mock dao to verify that the mock dao behaves the same as the real dao. To this end, we have a structure like this:
public abstract class DAOTestBase
{
public void testSimple()
{
// dummy assertion
assertTrue(true, "Hello");
}
}
#Test(groups = "fast")
public class TestMockDAO extends DAOTestBase
{
// setUp/tearDown and helper methods for mock
}
#Test(groups = "slow")
public class TestDAO extends DAOTestBase
{
// setUp/tearDown and helper methods for real DB
}
Unfortunately this doesn't work - TestNG doesn't think that the testSimple method is a test and hence won't run it. So instead I tried to annotate the testSimple method (or the DAOTestBase class):
A #Test annotation without any groups will lead to the same effect - the test won't run for either fast nor slow groups.
A #Test annotation with groups fast and slow will lead to the opposite effect - both TestMockDAO and TestDAO will be run regardless of whether only fast or only slow tests should be run.
A #Test annotation with a different group, say common, plus added dependsOnGroups="common" annotations in both TestMockDAO and TestDAO will also not work unless common is included in the groups to run which leads again to case 2 above (both TestMockDAO and TestDAO are run).
In the end, what I'm looking for is a way to be able to define the group for the inherited tests in the sub class, but it seems as if the #Test annotation is only applied to test methods in that very same class, not also to inherited methods that don't have a #Test annotation. Is there any other way to achieve this (without overriding all methods in the sub classes) ?
I am currently working through a similar situation.
A way to make test cases run is to use something like:
#Test
public void someTest() {
TestNG testng = new TestNG();
testng.setTestClasses(new Class[] { SomeTests.class });
testng.run();
}
Reference: http://testng.org/doc/documentation-main.html#running-testng-programmatically
Unforunately I am currently unable to get it to report the test cases within SomeTests.
Have you tried simply adding a #Test annotation on top of DAOTestBase? Each subclass will override it with its own group and this should make the method in the base a test method.
I am using TestNG 6.14.3 version and I found a solution using priority annotation.
Example:
I have a base test class:
public class TestBase {
#Test(priority = 0)
public void testA() {
assertTrue(true, "testA");
}
}
And another extended test class:
public class Test2 extends TestBase {
#Test(priority = 1)
public void testB() {
assertTrue(true, "testB");
}
}
When I run Test2 test class, I obtain the following esult:
testA: true
testB: true
I solved it this way:
The methods in the base class are in "base" group, but need to check if the test have been initialized.
public abstract DaoTestBase {
private boolean initialized = false;
#Test(groups = "base")
public void testSimple() {
if (!initialized) { return; }
// dummy assertion
assertTrue(true, "Hello");
}
}
The test is initialized in the child, in the BeforeClass annotated method.
#BeforeClass
protected void initialize() {
super.initialized = true;
}
If you annotate the parent class instead of the methods, you must pass inheritGroups=false and the group, since it inherits also the group of the base class and it will not work.
Now, you must run TestNG to check groups base,fast or base,slow. Both tests will be executed, but the one not initialized will do nothing.
It is ugly, and I would not recommend it (it looks better to redefine the methods in child and call the according super method), but in my case I need priority in my test methods, and I want to avoid that repetition in each child class.

Categories

Resources