![]() Mockito is a powerful tool for creating mock objects in Java to mock generic and regular classes. Mocking complex behavior: While Mockito is good at mocking simple behavior, it can be more challenging to mock complex or nuanced behavior, which may require more manual setup or custom Answer implementations.Mocking static methods: Mockito does not directly support the mocking of static methods, although this can be done using the PowerMock library in combination with Mockito.Mocking final classes and methods: Mockito cannot mock final classes or methods, which can be a limitation if you need to test code that relies on these classes or methods.Mocking generic classes: As mentioned earlier, Mockito's mock() method uses type erasure, making it difficult to mock generic classes in a way that preserves their type information.Some potential disadvantages of using Mockito include the following: Mockito allows you to create mock objects of various types, including regular classes, interfaces, and final classes. It supports a variety of mock object types.Mockito works well with other testing tools and libraries, such as JUnit and PowerMock. Mockito is a popular library with a large user base, which means it's well tested and has a wealth of documentation and resources available. Mockito has a simple and intuitive API that makes it easy to create and use mock objects in your tests. Here are some advantages of using Mockito: This means that the type information of the generic class is not preserved at runtime, which can cause issues if you try to use the mock object in a way that relies on the specific type parameters of the class.įor example, consider the following generic class: One important thing to keep in mind when mocking generic classes is that Mockito's mock() method uses type erasure to create the mock object. However, with a bit of practice and an understanding of how Mockito works, you should be able to use it to mock generic classes in your tests effectively. Using Mockito to mock a generic class can be more complicated than mocking a regular class due to the added complexity of generics. So you'll still need to use the when() and thenReturn() methods or another method of specifying the mock object's behavior, such as the Answer interface or a custom Answer implementation. Keep in mind that the annotation only creates mock objects. The annotation is a convenient way to create and manage mock objects in your tests and can save you time and boilerplate code when setting up mock objects. How about: verify(c, times(4)).When(mock.doSomething()).thenReturn(true) To be fair, the documentation does specify that anyString() only matches non-null strings. I find this a bit misleading, because the API seems to suggest that anyString() is just an alias for any(String.class) at least up till the 2.0 update. I got this to work by switching to any(String.class) So, the way to match nullable string arguments is explicit declaration: nullable(String.class) We felt thisĬhange would make tests harness much safer that it was with Mockito Is a nullable reference, the suggested API to match Since Mockito 2.1.0, only allow non-null String. ![]() ![]() Verify(c, times(4)).foo(anyString(), anyString()) How can I define a matcher to work in all 4 cases? M圜lass c = mock(M圜lass.class) With issue #134 "fixed", this code fails because the matchers only match in the first case. So what't the correct way to define an ArgumentMatcher for a parameter that might be null? However, I'm running into trouble setting it up because Mockito has decided that the behaviour I'm expecting is a bug: So I'm trying to match the method parameters, but I don't really care about the actual values in this test, because I don't want to make my test brittle. I'm trying to verify that the class I'm testing calls the correct dependency class's method.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |