Android UI testing with mocked dependencies - android

I have an activity in which I provide a button. Clicking on the button invokes a method in a data provider class and based on the return value of the method I make UI changes. Now I want to write an instrumented test where I perform click() in the button but avoid actually calling the method in the data provider class. Instead I want to return a desired value from the method and then check if the UI was modified accordingly.
MyActivity
#Override
public void onCreate(final Bundle savedInstanceState) {
mActionButton.setOnClickListener(new View.OnClickListener()
{
#Override
public void onClick(final View v) {
boolean result = dataProvider.getResult();
if(result) {
mSuccessTextView.setVisibility(View.VISIBLE);
}
}
});
}
Here, on button click, a call is made to DataProvider#getResult and the result from this method is stored in result. If the result is true a TextView mSuccessTextView, previously GONE, is now made VISIBLE.
The problem here is DataProvider#getResult deals with a lot of external components that would make testing impossible. So what I want to do is use a mocked instance of DataProvider so that I can get getResult to return a desired value and then check the visibility of mSuccessTextView. This is what I tried :
MyActivityTest.java
#RunWith(AndroidJUnit4.class)
public class MyActivityTest {
private DataProvider mDataProvider;
#Rule
public IntentsTestRule<MyActivity> mIntentRule =
new IntentsTestRule<>(MyClientActivity.class);
#Before
public void setUp() {
mDataProvider = mock(DataProvider.class);
}
#Test
public void testResultSuccess() {
boolean result = true;
when(mDataProvider.getResult()).thenReturn(result);
onView(withId(R.id.action_button)).perform(click());
onView(withId(R.id.success_text_view)).check((ViewAssertion) isDisplayed());
}
}
Doing the above generates the following error :
org.mockito.exceptions.base.MockitoException:
Mockito cannot mock this class: class com.domain.myapp.DataProvider.
Mockito can only mock non-private & non-final classes.
If you're not sure why you're getting this error, please report to the mailing list.
Underlying exception : java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException: Cannot define class using reflection
.
.
.
Caused by: java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException: Cannot define class using reflection
.
.
.
Caused by: java.lang.IllegalStateException: This JVM's version string does not seem to be valid: 0
.
.
.

Even if you could mock DataProvider, it would not help you because you are not injecting its instance into MyClientActivity during your test. Reasons for not able to mock DataProvider are unknown, pls provide the class.

Related

How to test void method with Mockito's doAnswer

I am new to Mockito and trying to understand how to use doAnswer in order to test a void method.
Here's my class with the onDestroy method to test:
public class TPresenter implements TContract.Presenter {
private CompositeSubscription viewSubscription;
//.......
#Override public void onCreate(.......) {
this.viewSubscription = new CompositeSubscription();
//.......
}
#Override public void onDestroy() {
if(viewSubscription != null && !viewSubscription.isUnsubscribed()) {
viewSubscription.unsubscribe();
}
}
Now I want to write a test for onDestroy() namely to verify that after executing onDestroy the subscription is unsubscribed. I found several examples to use doAnswer for testing void methods, for example here, and also here but I do not understand them.
Please show how to test the method onDestroy.
The normal way how you could test your onDestroy() would be based on viewSubscription being a mocked object. And then you would do something like:
#Test
public testOnDestroyWithoutUnsubscribe() {
when(mockedSubscription.isUnsubscribed()).thenReturn(false);
//... trigger onDestroy()
verifyNoMoreInteractions(mockedSubscription);
}
#Test
public testOnDestroyWithUnsubscribe() {
when(mockedSubscription.isUnsubscribed()).thenReturn(true);
//... trigger onDestroy()
verify
verify(mockedSubscription, times(1)).unsubscribe();
}
In other words: you create a mocked object, and you configure it to take both paths that are possible. Then you verify that the expected actions took place (or not, that is what the first test case does: ensure you do not unsubscribe).
Of course, you can't test the "subscription object is null" case (besides making it null, and ensuring that no NPE gets thrown when triggering the onDestroy()!
Given the comment by the OP: one doesn't necessarily have to use mocking here. But when you want to test a void method, your options are pretty limited. You have to observe side effects somehow!
If you can get a non-mocked viewSubscription instance to do that, fine, then do that. But if not, then somehow inserting a mocked instance is your next best choice. How to do the "dependency injection" depends on the exact context, such as the mocking/testing frameworks you are using.
Testing void methods in your main class under test is not a problem as does not require doAnswer.
Here is an example of how could you go about testing the call to unsubscribe.
import static org.mockito.Mockito.never;
import static org.mockito.Mockito.verify;
import static org.mockito.Mockito.when;
#RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class)
public class TPresenterTest {
#InjectMocks
private TPresenter target = new TPresenter();
#Mock
private CompositeSubscription viewSubscription;
#Test
public void onDestroyShouldUnsubscribeWhenSubscriptionNotNullAndUnsubscribed() {
when(viewSubscription.isUnsubscribed()).thenReturn(false);
target.onDestroy();
verify(viewSubscription).unsubscribe();
}
#Test
public void onDestroyShouldNotUnsubscribeWhenSubscriptionNotNullAndNotUnsubscribed() {
when(viewSubscription.isUnsubscribed()).thenReturn(true);
target.onDestroy();
verify(viewSubscription, never()).unsubscribe();
}
}
As I mentioned in my comment to #GhostCat 's answer, my example is in fact un-testable because of the "new" instance of CompositeSubscription class. I would have to re-factor it and #GhostCat 's comment to his/her answer shows a way to do it.

ArgumentCaptor captures wrong class

SOLVED: Even if the getValue() on the Argument Captor shows you this, it is normal. To be honest I was expecting to see and instance on the OnLoginWithEmailCallback interface here. The problem on my side was related to a method call on mView which was generating a NPE. Works like a charm now.
ORIGINAL PROBLEM:
I am implementing my first unit test using Mockito in my MVP app and I need to mock the behaviour of a callback when the user is logging in. I am using Firebase to handle the authentication.
I followed a very good tutorial from here : https://fernandocejas.com/2014/04/08/unit-testing-asynchronous-methods-with-mockito/.
I am calling method on class under test. This method calls another one on the Auth Presenter which does the actual work
mPresenter.performLoginWithEmail(EMAIL, PASSWORD);
Then I am verifying that an underlining method in the Auth Presenter class was called. I try to capture the callback interface.
verify(mAuthPresenter, times(1)).login(mOnLoginWithEmailCallbackArgumentCaptor.capture(),
eq(EMAIL), eq(PASSWORD));
The problem is that getValue() from the Argument Captor returns an instance of the mPresenter (class under test) instead of the OnLoginWithEmailCallback interface class. Therefore I get an NPE.
mOnLoginWithEmailCallbackArgumentCaptor.getValue().onLoginWithEmailSuccess();
Here is the complete test class:
#RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class)
public class LoginPresenterTest {
private static String EMAIL = "test#rmail.com";
private static String PASSWORD = "1234";
//class under test
private LoginPresenter mPresenter;
#Mock
AuthPresenter mAuthPresenter;
#Captor
private ArgumentCaptor<OnLoginWithEmailCallback> mOnLoginWithEmailCallbackArgumentCaptor;
#Mock
ILoginActivityView mView;
#Before
public void setupLoginPresenter() {
MockitoAnnotations.initMocks(this);
// Get a reference to the class under test
mPresenter = new LoginPresenter(mView, mAuthPresenter);
}
#Test
public void performLoginWithEmail() {
mPresenter.performLoginWithEmail(EMAIL, PASSWORD);
//wanting to have control over the callback object. therefore call capture to then call methods on the interface
verify(mAuthPresenter, times(1)).login(mOnLoginWithEmailCallbackArgumentCaptor.capture(),
eq(EMAIL), eq(PASSWORD));
mOnLoginWithEmailCallbackArgumentCaptor.getValue().onLoginWithEmailSuccess();
InOrder inOrder = Mockito.inOrder(mView);
inOrder.verify(mView).goToMap();
inOrder.verify(mView).hideProgressBar();
}
}
EDIT: This is the call to mAuthPresenter.login:
SOLVED: getLoginActivityView() was causing an NPE
public void performLoginWithEmail(String email, String password) {
mAuthPresenter.login(new OnLoginWithEmailCallback() {
#Override
public void onLoginWithEmailSuccess() {
getLoginActivityView().goToMap();
getLoginActivityView().hideProgressBar();
}
#Override
public void onLoginWithEmailFailed(String error) {
getLoginActivityView().hideProgressBar();
getLoginActivityView().showToast(error);
}
}, email, password);
}
I also tried using using doAnswer from Mockito:
doAnswer(new Answer() {
#Override
public Object answer(InvocationOnMock invocation) throws Throwable {
((OnLoginWithEmailCallback)invocation.getArguments()[0]).onLoginWithEmailSuccess();
return null;
}
}).when(mAuthPresenter).login(
any(OnLoginWithEmailCallback.class, EMAIL, PASSWORD));
Still, invocation.getArguments() return an instance of the class under test (LoginPresenter), so the same problem as before. Can you help me?
The problem was that i got confused by the Argument Captor which returned me an instance of the caller class (LoginPresenter). The problem in my case was with a method inside the anonymouse class OnLoginWithEmailCallback() which was throwing an NPE.

Roboelectric : How to resolve depended object

I have one activity and I am testing one method of it using Roboelectic Framework but I am getting null pointer exception.
following is test code
#Test
public void processTest() throws Exception {
MyActivity activity = Robolectric.setupActivity(MyActivity.class);
activity.setValue();
tView = (TextView) activity.findViewById(R.id.text);
assertEquals(“1”,tView.getText().toString());
}
following is setValue method of activity
public class MyActivity extends AppCompatActivity {
TextView tView;
#Inject Student s;
#Override
public void onCreate() {
tView = (TextView) activity.findViewById(R.id.text);
}
public void setValue() {
String id = s.getId();
tView.setText(S);
}
I am getting null pointer error on String id = s.getId(); line when I run test
I know s is null. but my question how to make it available in Test using Roboelectric without using Mokito ?
Are you sure you pasted your code exactly as it run? onCreate should have parameter of Bundle, and the activity has not called setConentView before you do findViewById, and some other problems....
In general, The activity constructed by Robolectric.setupActivity should be ready for use in the rest of the test case, and onCreate(Bundle) should have been executed before return.

How do I make my activity use testing data?

I have an application which displays data (posts) from a web API.
A background service syncs this data at some unknown time and saves it.
When visiting my main activity it loads this data and displays it in a RecyclerView
The loading is handled via a singleton class
I currently test the main activity as follows
#Rule
public ActivityTestRule<MainActivity> mActivityRule = new ActivityTestRule<>(MainActivity.class);
#Test
public void testDataLoad() {
int postsTotal = DataSingleton.getInstance().getPostsCount();
ViewInteraction empty = onView(withId(R.id.empty_view));
ViewInteraction recycler = onView(withId(R.id.recycler_view));
if (postsTotal == 0) {
empty.check(matches(isDisplayed()));
recycler.check(matches(not(isDisplayed())));
} else {
empty.check(matches(not(isDisplayed())));
recycler.check(matches(isDisplayed()));
recycler.check(new RecyclerViewItemCountAssertion(greaterThan(postsTotal)));
}
}
I know that this can't be the right way to write tests. I want to be able to test both with an empty data set and a non-empty set so that the if-else is two separate tests. The only way I think I can achieve it is to mock the data.
Is there another way?
Can I use Mockito to make the MainActivity use mock data without modifying the production code? Is my only choice to make it inject either real or mocked data providers in place of my singleton?
Is it better to just uninstall and reinstall my app each time so there is no data to start with and then continue with real data testing?
Android Activity are heavyweight and hard to test. Because we don't have control over the constructor, it is hard to swap in test doubles.
The first thing to do is to make sure you are depending on an abstraction of the data-source rather than a concretion. So if you are using a singleton with a getPostsCount() method then extract an interface:
interface DataSourceAbstraction {
int getPostsCount();
}
Make a wrapper class that implements your interface:
class ConcreteDataSource implements DataSourceAbstraction {
#Override
int getPostsCount() {
return DataSingleton.getInstance().getPostsCount();
}
}
And make the Activity depend on that rather than the concrete DataSingleton
DataSourceAbstraction dataSourceAbstraction;
#Override
protected void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super(savedInstanceState);
injectMembers();
}
#VisibleForTesting
void injectMembers() {
dataSourceAbstraction = new ConcreteDataSource();
}
You can now swap in a test double by subclassing and overriding injectMembers that has relaxed visibility. It's a bad idea do this in enterprise development, but there are less options in Android Activities where you don't control the constructor of the class.
You can now write:
DataSourceAbstraction dataSource;
//system under test
MainActivity mainActivity
#Before
public void setUp() {
mockDataSource = Mockito.mock(DataSourceAbstraction.class);
mainActivity = new MainActivity() {
#Override
void injectMembers() {
dataSourceAbstraction = mockDataSource;
}
};
}

Verify a static method was called by another static method in PowerMock

I have a Tool class with two static methods, doSomething(Object) and callDoSomething(). The names are intuitive in that callDoSomething delegates its call to doSomething(Object);
public class Tool
{
public static void doSomething( Object o )
{
}
public static void callDoSomething()
{
doSomething( new Object());
}
}
I have a Test class for Tool and I'd like to verify if doSomething(Object) was called (I want to do Argument Matching too in the future)
#RunWith( PowerMockRunner.class )
#PrepareForTest( { Tool.class } )
public class ToolTest
{
#Test
public void toolTest()
{
PowerMockito.mockStatic( Tool.class );
Tool.callDoSomething();// error!!
//Tool.doSomething();// this works! it gets verified!
PowerMockito.verifyStatic();
Tool.doSomething( Mockito.argThat( new MyArgMatcher() ) );
}
class MyArgMatcher extends ArgumentMatcher<Object>
{
#Override
public boolean matches( Object argument )
{
return true;
}
}
}
Verify picks up doSomething(Object) if it's called directly. I've commented this code out above. Verify does NOT pick up doSomething(Object) when using callDoSomething, (this is the code shown above). This is my error log when running the code above:
Wanted but not invoked tool.doSomething(null);
However, there were other interactions with this mock.
at org.powermock.api.mockito.internal.invocation.MockitoMethodInvocationControl.performIntercept(MockitoMethodInvocationControl.java:260)
at org.powermock.api.mockito.internal.invocation.MockitoMethodInvocationControl.invoke(MockitoMethodInvocationControl.java:192)
at org.powermock.core.MockGateway.doMethodCall(MockGateway.java:105)
at org.powermock.core.MockGateway.methodCall(MockGateway.java:60)
at Tool.doSomething(Tool.java)
at ToolTest.toolTest(ToolTest.java:22)
... [truncated]
I'd like to avoid making any changes to the Tool class. My question is, how can I verify doSomething(Object) was called from callDoSomething(), as well as perform some argument matching on doSomething's param
It sounds like you want to use a static spy (partial mock). The section of the PowerMock documentation that talks about mocking static has a note in the second bullet that could be easily missed:
(use PowerMockito.spy(class) to mock a specific method)
Note, in your example you're not actually mocking the behavior, just verifying the method is called. There's a subtle but important difference. If you don't want doSomething(Object) to be called you'd need to do something like this:
#Test
public void toolTest() {
PowerMockito.spy(Tool.class); //This will call real methods by default.
//This will suppress the method call.
PowerMockito.doNothing().when(Tool.class);
Tool.doSomething(Mockito.argThat( new MyArgMatcher() ));
Tool.callDoSomething();
//The rest isn't needed since you're already mocking the behavior
//but you can still leave it in if you'd like.
PowerMockito.verifyStatic();
Tool.doSomething(Mockito.argThat( new MyArgMatcher() ));
}
If you still want the method to fire though, just remove the two lines for doNothing(). (I added a simple System.out.println("do something " + o); to my version of Tool.java as an additional verification of doNothing().)
You can do your validation with this:
public class Tool{
public static boolean isFromCallDoSomethingMethod= false;
public static void doSomething(Object o){
}
public static void callDoSomething() {
doSomething(new Object());
isFromCallDoSomethingMethod= true;
}
}
You can do the verification as:
if(Tool.isFromCallDoSomethingMethod){
//you called doSomething() from callDoSomething();
}
REMEMBER
Don't forget to do the validation if you call the doSomething() from another way that is not from callDoSomething(), you can do this by ussing Tool.isFromCallDoSomethingMethod = false
Is this what you want?

Categories

Resources