Nabble - jMock

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

2009-11-24T11:32:55Z

> Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JMOCK-237
> URL: http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JMOCK-237
> Project: jMock
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: JMock 2.x.x Library
> Reporter: Ivan Yatskevich
> Attachments: JMockRule.java, JMockVerifier.java, JUnitRuleMockery.java
>
>
> This new feature should allow to use jMock in the following way:
> public class JMockRuleTest {
> @Rule public Verifier jmock = new JMockVerifier();
> }
> It will also open the possibility of using jMock with a custom JUnit runner like Theories.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

From forum: jMock - Dev

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

2009-11-24T11:32:55Z

From forum: jMock - Dev

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

2009-11-24T11:32:55Z

[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JMOCK-237?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=199264#action_199264 ]

Christian Baranowski edited comment on JMOCK-237 at 11/24/09 1:32 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

replaced base class JUnitMockery by Mockery and add the setup for the expectation error translator in the rule constructor.

See there for my last implementation in the attachted file JUnitRuleMockery.java

was (Author: baranowski):
replaced base class JUnitMockery by Mockery and add the setup for the expectation error translator in the rule constructor.

From forum: jMock - Dev

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

2009-11-24T11:27:55Z

[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JMOCK-237?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=199263#action_199263 ]

Christian Baranowski edited comment on JMOCK-237 at 11/24/09 1:27 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

@Jason Ng Yong Liang thanks,
and you are right there is bug in my last implementation we must verify if a exception is expceted by a test then we must also verify the mock objects, when a exception is not expected by the test we sould not verify the state of the mock objects, thats absolut true.

See there for my last implementation in the attachted file JUnitRuleMockery.java

I added a method isExceptionExpectedByTestMethod(...)

was (Author: baranowski):
@Jason Ng Yong Liang thanks,
and you are right there is bug in my last implementation we must verify if a exception is expceted by a test then we must also verify the mock objects, when a exception is not expected by the test we sould not verify the state of the mock objects, thats absolut true.

See there for my last implementation in the attachted file...

From forum: jMock - Dev

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

2009-11-24T11:25:55Z

From forum: jMock - Dev

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

2009-11-24T11:25:55Z

From forum: jMock - Dev

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

2009-11-24T11:23:55Z

[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JMOCK-237?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Christian Baranowski updated JMOCK-237:
---------------------------------------

Attachment: JUnitRuleMockery.java

@Jason Ng Yong Liang thanks,
and you are right there is bug in my last implementation we must verify if a exception is expceted by a test then we must also verify the mock objects, when a exception is not expected by the test we sould not verify the state of the mock objects, thats absolut true.

See there for my last implementation in the attachted file...

From forum: jMock - Dev

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

2009-11-24T11:23:55Z

From forum: jMock - Dev

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

2009-11-23T22:13:55Z

[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JMOCK-237?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=199171#action_199171 ]

Jason Ng Yong Liang edited comment on JMOCK-237 at 11/24/09 12:12 AM:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Great work Christian!
The 2nd solution you proposed is definitely much neater to use - no need to manage 2 separate objects.

Fyi, I have implemented your solution in my tests and it's working well.
However, I would prefer to rename the after method to verify since "after" is meant for tearing down external resources in JUnit 4 "vocabulary" (see org.junit#After and org.junit.rules#ExternalResource).

Just notice a problem with the evaluate method, in the event an AssertionError is thrown by the assertIsSatisfied method, we will have lost the Throwable thrown by the base.evaluate method. The try - final block should be removed.

Really hope this could be finalized soon as org.jmock.integration.junit4#JMock is based on org.junit.internal.runners#JUnit4ClassRunner, which has been deprecated since JUnit 4.5 (see http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/blob/master/doc/ReleaseNotes4.5.txt) and also does not support the use of Rules.

was (Author: jasonngyl):
Great work Christian!
The 2nd solution you proposed is definitely much neater to use - no need to manage 2 separate objects.

Fyi, I have implemented your solution in my tests and it's working well.
However, I would prefer to rename the after method to verify since "after" is meant for tearing down external resources in JUnit 4 "vocabulary" (see org.junit#After and org.junit.rules#ExternalResource).

Really hope this could be finalized soon as org.jmock.integration.junit4#JMock is based on org.junit.internal.runners#JUnit4ClassRunner, which has been deprecated since JUnit 4.5 (see http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/blob/master/doc/ReleaseNotes4.5.txt) and also does not support the use of Rules.

From forum: jMock - Dev

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

2009-11-23T20:01:55Z

[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JMOCK-237?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=199171#action_199171 ]

Jason Ng Yong Liang edited comment on JMOCK-237 at 11/23/09 10:01 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Great work Christian!
The 2nd solution you proposed is definitely much neater to use - no need to manage 2 separate objects.

Fyi, I have implemented your solution in my tests and it's working well.
However, I would prefer to rename the after method to verify since "after" is meant for tearing down external resources in JUnit 4 "vocabulary" (see org.junit#After and org.junit.rules#ExternalResource).

Really hope this could be finalized soon as org.jmock.integration.junit4#JMock is based on org.junit.internal.runners#JUnit4ClassRunner, which has been deprecated since JUnit 4.5 (see http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/blob/master/doc/ReleaseNotes4.5.txt) and also does not support the use of Rules.

was (Author: jasonngyl):
Great work Christian!
The 2nd solution you proposed is definitely much neater to use - no need to manage 2 separate objects.

Fyi, I have implemented your solution in my tests and it's working well.
However, I would prefer to rename the after method to verify since "after" is meant for tearing down external resources (see org.junit#After and org.junit.rules#ExternalResource).

Really hope this could be finalized soon as org.jmock.integration.junit4#JMock is based on org.junit.internal.runners#JUnit4ClassRunner, which has been deprecated since JUnit 4.5 (see http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/blob/master/doc/ReleaseNotes4.5.txt) and also does not support the use of Rules.

From forum: jMock - Dev

[jira] Commented: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

2009-11-23T19:58:55Z

[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/JMOCK-237?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=199171#action_199171 ]

Jason Ng Yong Liang commented on JMOCK-237:
-------------------------------------------

Great work Christian!
The 2nd solution you proposed is definitely much neater to use - no need to manage 2 separate objects.

Fyi, I have implemented your solution in my tests and it's working well.
However, I would prefer to rename the after method to verify since "after" is meant for tearing down external resources (see org.junit#After and org.junit.rules#ExternalResource).

Really hope this could be finalized soon as org.jmock.integration.junit4#JMock is based on org.junit.internal.runners#JUnit4ClassRunner, which has been deprecated since JUnit 4.5 (see http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/blob/master/doc/ReleaseNotes4.5.txt) and also does not support the use of Rules.

From forum: jMock - Dev

Re: JMock doesn't seem to be invoked when mocking a concrete class

2009-11-23T03:07:30Z

well, you're partially right. The problem is that the VirtualInstanceContextHolder contains a private constructor,an the way that class is used is by invoking a
VirtualInstanceContextHolder.getContext() which would return a VirtualInstanceContext object.
The bottom line is: I want to return a DTOFactory from my metod getDTOFactory in the Service class. Can I do that without setting up mock of all the things that the getDTOFactory is using?

Regards,
Viggo

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Julian Hall <jules@...> wrote:

Viggo Navarsete wrote:

I'm having a unit test which is supposed to test a Service. The Service in turn calls another class. I want to mock the invocations to the class the Service uses.

MyTest-->Service-->AConcreteClass

So, MyTest executes a method on Service, which in turn execute a method on a concrete class, AConcreteClass.
I want to mock the execution on the AConcreteClass in Service, but it doesn't seem to mock it.

Some code:

************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
MyTest:

@Test
public void testDataLoad() throws Exception {

Mockery context = new Mockery() {{
setImposteriser( ClassImposteriser.INSTANCE );
}};

final VirtualInstanceContextHolder vich = context.mock( VirtualInstanceContextHolder.class );
final VirtualInstanceContext vic = context.mock( VirtualInstanceContext.class );
final ApplicationContext ac = context.mock( ApplicationContext.class );
final Persistence persistence = context.mock( Persistence.class );
final Map<String, String> emMap = new HashMap<String, String>();

context.checking( new Expectations() {{
allowing( vich );
will( returnValue( new VirtualInstanceContext()));

Shouldn't this be returning vic?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

--
Viggo Navarsete
Senior Developer
TraceTracker AS

Øvre Slottsgt.4, 4th floor, N-0157 Oslo, Norway
Central number: +47 47 70 44 00
Direct number: +47 92 43 14 90
E-mail: viggo@...

TraceTracker was selected Technology Pioneer 2009 by the World Economic Forum.

This is a confidential business communication. If you have received it in error please notify the sender and delete it. Any unauthorized use of this communication is prohibited.Copyright 2009 TraceTracker AS, Oslo - Norway

Nabble - jMock

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

[jira] Issue Comment Edited: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

[jira] Commented: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

Re: JMock doesn't seem to be invoked when mocking a concrete class

RE [jmock-user] JMock doesn't seem to be invoked when mocking a concrete class

Re: JMock doesn't seem to be invoked when mocking a concrete class

JMock doesn't seem to be invoked when mocking a concrete class

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

Checkstyle check for @RunWith(JMock)

[jira] Updated: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

Re: error message with custom matcher

Re: error message with custom matcher

error message with custom matcher

Re: javax.xml package

[jira] Created: (JMOCK-238) PublisherTest on Getting Started Page

Re: Advice on testing my classes that has many third party API calls.

Re: javax.xml package

javax.xml package

[jira] Commented: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

[jira] Commented: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

[jira] Commented: (JMOCK-197) Mocking a static nested class causes a net.sf.cglib.core.CodeGenerationException to be thrown.

[jira] Commented: (JMOCK-125) Not able to mock classes with no visible construtor

Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism

[jira] Created: (JMOCK-237) Ability to use jMock through the Rule mechanism (introduced in JUnit 4.7)

Re: Advice on testing my classes that has many third party API calls.

Re: Differences between jMock & Mockito