I need to determine in runtime from code if the application is run under TestInstrumentation.
I could initialize the test environment with some env/system variable, but Eclipse ADK launch configuration would not allow me to do that.
Default Android system properties and environment do not to have any data about it. Moreover, they are identically same, whether the application is started regularly or under test.
This one could be a solution: Is it possible to find out if an Android application runs as part of an instrumentation test but since I do not test activities, all proposed methods there won't work. The ActivityManager.isRunningInTestHarness() method uses this under the hood:
SystemProperties.getBoolean("ro.test_harness")
which always returns false in my case. (To work with the hidden android.os.SystemProperties class I use reflection).
What else can I do to try to determine from inside the application if it's under test?
I have found one hacky solution: out of the application one can try to load a class from the testing package. The appication classloader surprisingly can load classes by name from the testing project if it was run under test. In other case the class is not found.
private static boolean isTestMode() {
boolean result;
try {
application.getClassLoader().loadClass("foo.bar.test.SomeTest");
// alternatively (see the comment below):
// Class.forName("foo.bar.test.SomeTest");
result = true;
} catch (final Exception e) {
result = false;
}
return result;
}
I admit this is not elegant but it works. Will be grateful for the proper solution.
The isTestMode() solution did not work for me on Android Studio 1.2.1.1. Almighty Krzysztof from our company tweaked your method by using:
Class.forName("foo.bar.test.SomeTest");
instead of getClassLoader(). Thanks for Krzysztof!
We created a solution to pass parameters to the MainActivity and use it inside the onCreate method, enabling you to define how the Activity will be created.
In MainActivity class, we created some constants, which could also be an enum. We created a static attribute too.
public class MainActivity {
public static final int APPLICATION_MODE = 5;
public static final int UNIT_TEST_MODE = 10;
public static final int OTHER_MODE = 15;
public static int activityMode = APPLICATION_MODE;
(...)
#Override
protected void onCreate(Bundle icicle) {
super.onCreate(icicle);
switch (activityMode) {
case OTHER_MODE:
(...)
break;
case UNIT_TEST_MODE:
Log.d(TAG, "Is in Test Mode!");
break;
case APPLICATION_MODE:
(...)
break;
}
(...)
}
(...)
}
We made MainActivityTest class abstract, created a setApplicationMode and called this method inside the setUp() method, before calling the super.setUp() method.
public abstract class MainActivityTest extends ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2<MainActivity> {
protected void setUp() throws Exception {
setApplicationMode(); // <=====
super.setUp();
getActivity();
(...)
}
(...)
public void setApplicationMode() {
MainActivity.activityMode = MainActivity.UNIT_TEST_MODE;
}
}
All other test classes inherit from MainActivityTest, if we want it to have another behaviour, we can simply override the setApplicationMode method.
public class OtherMainActivityTest extends MainActivityTest {
(...)
#Override
public void setApplicationMode() {
MainActivity.activityMode = MainActivity.OTHER_MODE;
}
}
The user nathan-almeida is the friend that is co-author of this solution.
Related
I've started learning android unit tests, but it looks very hard to find some good guides or information. Every example have a stupid example about 2+2 = 4
Say I write a little SDK which has few functions
MySdk.Init(Context context)
MySdk.CallTask()
I create an androidTest file
How should I call my SDK functions to check how they work? Somewhere required parameters like int/string/context. I just really don't understand, please help me.
This is what I've tried
public class AndroidTest {
private Activity context;
//default test
#Test
public void addition_correct() throws Exception {
assertEquals(4, 2 + 2);
}
#Test
public void checkContext() {
context = getActivity();
assertNotNull(context);
}
#Test
public void testInitPhase() {
MySdk.Init(context, new SdkInitializationListener() {
#Override
public void onInitializationSuccessful(String adv_id) {
assert (adv_id != null);
}
#Override
public void onInitializationError() {
}
});
}
}
For context i was tried context = new mockContext();. It's passed as context = null and my SDK failed with initialization.
Unit tests are mainly about testing an individual class in isolation, so that you can check if individual public methods of a class behave as you intend them to, and continue to do so if you change that class' code in the future. Let's say you have a class like this:
public class UtilityFunctions {
public int double(int value) {
return value * 2;
}
public String mirror(String value) {
if (value == null) return "";
return value + new StringBuilder(value).reverse().toString();
}
}
You want to test these two methods with:
valid input values, and check the output is as expected
invalid values, and check that errors are handled accordingly (and the correct exceptions thrown if necessary)
So a test class for the above class may look like this
#RunWith(JUnit4.class)
public class UtilityFunctionsTest {
private UtilityFunctions utility;
#Before
public void setUp() {
// Initialises any conditions before each test
utility = new UtilityFunctions();
}
#Test
public void testDoubleFunction() {
assertEquals(2, utility.double(1));
assertEquals(8, utility.double(4));
assertEquals(-12, utility.double(-6));
assertEquals(0, utility.double(0));
}
#Test
public void testMirror() {
assertEquals("", utility.mirror(null));
assertEquals("", utility.mirror(""));
assertEquals("aa", utility.mirror("a"));
assertEquals("MirrorrorriM", utility.mirror("Mirror"));
}
}
These standard Java unit tests are run from the test directory. However, you'll need to run tests in the androidTest directory whenever you're using Android-specific classes such as Context. If you're creating a MockContext, you're simply creating an empty Context whose methods don't do anything.
Without me knowing anything about what your MySDK does, I think you may need to pass a fully-functioning Context into your class for your tests. The Android JUnit runner does provide this with InstrumentationRegistry.getTargetContext(), so for your example, you may need to add this #Before method:
#Before
public void setUp() {
context = InstrumentationRegistry.getTargetContext();
}
You'll also need to remove the context = getActivity(); line from your first test.
Here is my scenario.
I have an android activity in which I want to abstract my I/O dependencies. The dependencies are represented by this interface (edited for brevity and simplicity):
public interface ITimeDataServer {
TimeRecord[] get(int userID);
void save(TimeRecord record);
}
What I want is for my activity to be able to call these interface methods, and leave the implementation to be supplied by the calling code. (Pretty standard, I think).
ITimeDataServer myServer;
int myUserID;
void loadRecords() {
TimeRecord[] records = myServer.get(myUserID);
// etc...
}
My difficulty is, how can I ensure that myServer gets set?
This seems like a common problem, but I can't find a clean solution.
My first thought would be that myServer would be passed in through the constructor, but Android activities aren't really instantiated with constructors.
I've come up with several solutions, but they're all icky in some way:
Icky Solution 1
Create a static method to launch the activity class which takes an ITimeDataServer parameter and stores it in a static variable from which the activity can access it:
private static ITimeDataSource theDataSource;
public static void launch(Activity currentActivity, ITimeDataSource dataSource) {
theDataSource = dataSource;
Intent intent = new Intent(currentActivity, MainActivity.class);
currentActivity.startActivity(intent);
}
This is icky because (a) the data source is static and not actually associated with the instance, and (b) a consumer could initiate the activity by the standard activity API rather than this static method, which will cause NullPointerException.
Icky Solution 2
I can create a Provider class which provides a singleton instance of ITimeDataSource, which needs to be initialized by the calling library before use:
public class TimeDataSourceProvider {
private static ITimeDataSource myDataSource = null;
public void initialize(ITimeDataSource dataSource) {
myDataSource = dataSource;
}
public ITimeDataSource get() {
if (myDataSource == null)
throw new NullPointerException("TimeDataSourceProvider.initialize() must be called before .get() can be used.");
else
return myDataSource;
}
}
This seems a little less icky, but it's still a little icky because the activity's dependency is not obvious, and since there may be many paths to launch it, it's highly possible that some of them would forget to call TimeDataSourceProvider.initialize().
Icky solution 3
As a variation on #2, create a static IODependencyProvider class which must be initialized with ALL dependencies on app startup.
public class IODependencyProvider {
static ITimeDataSource myTimeData;
static IScheduleDataSource myScheduleData; // etc
public static void initialize(ITimeDataSource timeData, IScheduleDataSource scheduleData /* etc */) {
myTimeData = timeData;
myScheduleData = scheduleData;
//etc
}
public static ITimeDataSource getTimeData() {
if (myTimeData == null)
throw new NullPointerException("IODependencyProvider.initialize() must be called before the getX() methods can be used.");
else
return myTimeData;
}
// getScheduleData(), etc
}
This seems superior to #1 and #2 since a failure to initialize would be much harder to sneak by, but it also creates interdependencies among the data types that otherwise need not exist.
...and other icky variations on that theme.
The common themes that make these solutions crappy:
the need to use static fields to pass non-serializable information to an activity
the lack of ability to enforce initialization of those static fields (and subsequent haphazardness)
inability to clearly identify an activity's dependencies (due to reliance on statics)
What's a nooby Android developer to do?
As long as these dependencies implement Parcelable correctly, you should be able to add them to your intent, then unparcel them as ITimeDataServer and get the correct class.
I found a nice solution here, in the least-loved answer.
I define the library activity as abstract and with no default constructor, but a constructor that takes an interface, like so:
public abstract class TimeActivity extends AppCompatActivity {
private ITimeDataSource myTimeDataSource;
public TimeActivity(#NonNull ITimeDataSource dataSource) {
myTimeDataSource = dataSource;
}
#Override
protected void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
setContentView(R.layout.activity_time);
// do stuff with myTimeDataSource!
}
}
Then, the calling code can create a concrete subclass with its chosen implementation that does have a parameterless constructor. No static members, easy-peasy!
This allows you to abstract and inject all sorts of crazy behaviours! Woooo!
(Note that the concrete subclass activity needs to be manually added to AndroidManifest.xml, like all activities, or the app will crash when it tries to launch.)
I've recently gone whole-hog with Dagger because the concept of DI makes complete sense. One of the nicer "by-products" of DI (as Jake Wharton put in one of his presentations) is easier testability.
So now I'm basically using Espresso to do some functional testing, and I want to be able to inject dummy/mock data to the application and have the activity show them up. I'm guessing since, this is one of the biggest advantages of DI, this should be a relatively simple ask. For some reason though, I can't seem to wrap my head around it. Any help would be much appreciated. Here's what I have so far (I've written up an example that reflects my current setup):
public class MyActivity
extends MyBaseActivity {
#Inject Navigator _navigator;
#Override
public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
MyApplication.get(this).inject(this);
// ...
setupViews();
}
private void setupViews() {
myTextView.setText(getMyLabel());
}
public String getMyLabel() {
return _navigator.getSpecialText(); // "Special Text"
}
}
These are my dagger modules:
// Navigation Module
#Module(library = true)
public class NavigationModule {
private Navigator _nav;
#Provides
#Singleton
Navigator provideANavigator() {
if (_nav == null) {
_nav = new Navigator();
}
return _nav;
}
}
// App level module
#Module(
includes = { SessionModule.class, NavigationModule.class },
injects = { MyApplication.class,
MyActivity.class,
// ...
})
public class App {
private final Context _appContext;
AppModule(Context appContext) {
_appContext = appContext;
}
// ...
}
In my Espresso Test, I'm trying to insert a mock module like so:
public class MyActivityTest
extends ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2<MyActivity> {
public MyActivityTest() {
super(MyActivity.class);
}
#Override
public void setUp() throws Exception {
super.setUp();
ObjectGraph og = ((MyApplication) getActivity().getApplication()).getObjectGraph().plus(new TestNavigationModule());
og.inject(getActivity());
}
public void test_SeeSpecialText() {
onView(withId(R.id.my_text_view)).check(matches(withText(
"Special Dummy Text")));
}
#Module(includes = NavigationModule.class,
injects = { MyActivityTest.class, MyActivity.class },
overrides = true,
library = true)
static class TestNavigationModule {
#Provides
#Singleton
Navigator provideANavigator() {
return new DummyNavigator(); // that returns "Special Dummy Text"
}
}
}
This is not working at all. My Espresso tests run, but the TestNavigationModule is completely ignored... arr... :(
What am I doing wrong? Is there a better approach to mocking modules out with Espresso? I've searched and seen examples of Robolectric, Mockito etc. being used. But I just want pure Espresso tests and need to swap out a module with my mock one. How should i be doing this?
EDIT:
So I went with #user3399328 approach of having a static test module list definition, checking for null and then adding it in my Application class. I'm still not getting my Test injected version of the class though. I have a feeling though, its probably something wrong with dagger test module definition, and not my espresso lifecycle. The reason I'm making the assumption is that I add debug statements and find that the static test module is non-empty at time of injection in the application class. Could you point me to a direction of what I could possibly be doing wrong. Here are code snippets of my definitions:
MyApplication:
#Override
public void onCreate() {
// ...
mObjectGraph = ObjectGraph.create(Modules.list(this));
// ...
}
Modules:
public class Modules {
public static List<Object> _testModules = null;
public static Object[] list(MyApplication app) {
// return new Object[]{ new AppModule(app) };
List<Object> modules = new ArrayList<Object>();
modules.add(new AppModule(app));
if (_testModules == null) {
Log.d("No test modules");
} else {
Log.d("Test modules found");
}
if (_testModules != null) {
modules.addAll(_testModules);
}
return modules.toArray();
}
}
Modified test module within my test class:
#Module(overrides = true, library = true)
public static class TestNavigationModule {
#Provides
#Singleton
Navigator provideANavigator()() {
Navigator navigator = new Navigator();
navigator.setSpecialText("Dummy Text");
return navigator;
}
}
With Dagger 2 and Espresso 2 things have indeed improved. This is how a test case could look like now. Notice that ContributorsModel is provided by Dagger. The full demo available here: https://github.com/pmellaaho/RxApp
#RunWith(AndroidJUnit4.class)
public class MainActivityTest {
ContributorsModel mModel;
#Singleton
#Component(modules = MockNetworkModule.class)
public interface MockNetworkComponent extends RxApp.NetworkComponent {
}
#Rule
public ActivityTestRule<MainActivity> mActivityRule = new ActivityTestRule<>(
MainActivity.class,
true, // initialTouchMode
false); // launchActivity.
#Before
public void setUp() {
Instrumentation instrumentation = InstrumentationRegistry.getInstrumentation();
RxApp app = (RxApp) instrumentation.getTargetContext()
.getApplicationContext();
MockNetworkComponent testComponent = DaggerMainActivityTest_MockNetworkComponent.builder()
.mockNetworkModule(new MockNetworkModule())
.build();
app.setComponent(testComponent);
mModel = testComponent.contributorsModel();
}
#Test
public void listWithTwoContributors() {
// GIVEN
List<Contributor> tmpList = new ArrayList<>();
tmpList.add(new Contributor("Jesse", 600));
tmpList.add(new Contributor("Jake", 200));
Observable<List<Contributor>> testObservable = Observable.just(tmpList);
Mockito.when(mModel.getContributors(anyString(), anyString()))
.thenReturn(testObservable);
// WHEN
mActivityRule.launchActivity(new Intent());
onView(withId(R.id.startBtn)).perform(click());
// THEN
onView(ViewMatchers.nthChildOf(withId(R.id.recyclerView), 0))
.check(matches(hasDescendant(withText("Jesse"))));
onView(ViewMatchers.nthChildOf(withId(R.id.recyclerView), 0))
.check(matches(hasDescendant(withText("600"))));
onView(ViewMatchers.nthChildOf(withId(R.id.recyclerView), 1))
.check(matches(hasDescendant(withText("Jake"))));
onView(ViewMatchers.nthChildOf(withId(R.id.recyclerView), 1))
.check(matches(hasDescendant(withText("200"))));
}
Your approach doesn't work because it only happens once, and as Matt mentioned, when the activity's real injection code runs, it will wipe out any variables injected by your special object graph.
There are two ways to get this to work.
The quick way: make a public static variable in your activity so a test can assign an override module and have the actual activity code always include this module if it's not null (which will only happen in tests). It's similar to my answer here just for your activity base class instead of application.
The longer, probably better way: refactor your code so that all activity injection (and more importantly graph creation) happens in one class, something like ActivityInjectHelper. In your test package, create another class named ActivityInjectHelper with the exact same package path that implements the same methods, except also plusses your test modules. Because test classes are loaded first, your application will execute with the testing ActivityInjectHelper. Again it's similar to my answer here just for a different class.
UPDATE:
I see you've posted more code and it's close to working, but no cigar. For both activities and applications, the test module needs to be snuck in before onCreate() runs. When dealing with activity object graphs, anytime before the test's getActivity() is fine. When dealing with applications, it's a bit harder because onCreate() has already been called by the time setUp() runs. Luckily, doing it in the test's constructor works - the application hasn't been created at that point. I briefly mention this in my first link.
The call to getActivity will actually start your activity calling onCreate in the process which means you won't be getting your test modules added to the graph in time to be used. Using activityInstrumentationTestcase2 you can't really inject properly at the activity scope. I've worked around this by using my application to provide dependencies to my activities and then inject mock objects into it which the activities will use. It's not ideal but it works. You can use an event bus like Otto to help provide dependencies.
EDIT: the below in post form http://systemdotrun.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/android-testing-with-dagger-retrofit.html
To test an Activity using Espresso + Dagger I have done the below
Inspired by the answer from #user3399328 I have a DaggerHelper class inside my Application class, which allows the test case to override the #Providers using Test #Modules which supply mocks. As long as
1) This is done before the testCases getActivity() call is made (as my inject call happens in my activity inside Activity.onCreate)
2) tearDown removes the test modules from the object graph.
Examples below.
Note: this is not ideal as this is subject to similar pitfalls of using factory methods for IoC but at least this way its only ever a single call in tearDown() to bring the system under test back to normal.
The DaggerHelper inside my Application class
public static class DaggerHelper
{
private static ObjectGraph sObjectGraph;
private static final List<Object> productionModules;
static
{
productionModules = new ArrayList<Object>();
productionModules.add(new DefaultModule());
}
/**
* Init the dagger object graph with production modules
*/
public static void initProductionModules()
{
initWithModules(productionModules);
}
/**
* If passing in test modules make sure to override = true in the #Module annotation
*/
public static void initWithTestModules(Object... testModules)
{
initWithModules(getModulesAsList(testModules));
}
private static void initWithModules(List<Object> modules)
{
sObjectGraph = ObjectGraph.create(modules.toArray());
}
private static List<Object> getModulesAsList(Object... extraModules)
{
List<Object> allModules = new ArrayList<Object>();
allModules.addAll(productionModules);
allModules.addAll(Arrays.asList(extraModules));
return allModules;
}
/**
* Dagger convenience method - will inject the fields of the passed in object
*/
public static void inject(Object object) {
sObjectGraph.inject(object);
}
}
My Test module inside my test class
#Module (
overrides = true,
injects = ActivityUnderTest.class
)
static class TestDataPersisterModule {
#Provides
#Singleton
DataPersister provideMockDataPersister() {
return new DataPersister(){
#Override
public void persistDose()
{
throw new RuntimeException("Mock DI!"); //just a test to see if being called
}
};
}
}
Test method
public void testSomething()
{
MyApp.DaggerHelper.initWithTestModules(new TestDataPersisterModule());
getActivity();
...
}
Tear down
#Override
public void tearDown() throws Exception
{
super.tearDown();
//reset
MyApp.DaggerHelper.initProductionModules();
}
I have problem with creating JUnit Test Automation.
My project has many activities (some activities inside other activities).
So I create testcase for each activity. But the problem how can i call a testcase inside other testcases (like activity inside other activities).
Can any one give me some idear?
Thanks.....
You tests should live in a different project not with your Activities.
Then the test runner, usually InstrumentationTestRunner, will be able to discover and run your test cases using instrospection.
Disclaimer: this can get very, very messy. If you need one test case to spawn another test case, there's probably a better way of doing it.
JUnit operates on classes. If you want to create tests at runtime, you have to create classes at runtime. Here, the method specializedTester creates an anonymous subclass where getInstance() returns specialized Activity objects for testing.
public abstract class ActivityTestCase extends TestCase {
public abstract Activity getInstance();
public static Class specializedTester(final String specialty) {
return new ActivityTestCase() {
public Activity getInstance() {
return new Activity(specialty);
}
};
}
public void testChildActivities() {
Activity activity = getInstance();
for(Activity a : activity.children()) {
// "check ripeness", "bargain hunt", "check out", etc
Class c = specializedTester(a.specialty);
suite.addTestSuite(c);
}
}
static TestSuite suite;
public static void main(String[] args) {
suite = new TestSuite(ActivityTestCase.specializedTester("buy groceries"));
TestRunner.run(suite);
}
}
anyone could help me with the problem: how to test android apps which uses ormlite?
I'd like to know how to create mocks form dao. This code gets me a dao
public Dao<Account, Integer> getAccountDao() throws SQLException {
if (accountDao == null) {
accountDao = getDao(Account.class);
}
return accountDao;
}
My testing activity looks this:
public class OrmActivity extends OrmLiteBaseActivity<DatabaseHelper> {
/** Called when the activity is first created. */
#Override
public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
setContentView(R.layout.main);
initUi();
initUiListeners();
RuntimeExceptionDao<Account, Integer> accountDao = getHelper().getAccountDataDao();
Account account = new Account();
account.setName("name");
account.setPassword("password");
accountDao.create(account);
}
I dont want to create separate database for tests. Instend of it I want to use mocks.
Best regards
Just in case anyone else stumbles across this post. The issue I had was that you need an instance of an Activity so you can pass the context to the OpenHelperManager.getHelper(android.content.Context context, Class openHelperClass) method.
To get around this I create a ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2 test class to provide the context. You could use MockContext but I understand it to be problematic. This way is simple stupid, sort of :)
At that point I don't bother testing any of the Activity functionality, just database functionality.
public class TestActivity extends ActivityInstrumentationTestCase2<MainFragment> {
public TestActivity() {
super(MainFragment.class);
}
protected void setUp() throws Exception {
super.setUp();
//DatabaseHelper.class is the extended OrmLiteSqliteOpenHelper class
OpenHelperManager.getHelper(getActivity(), DatabaseHelper.class);
}
protected void tearDown() throws Exception {
OpenHelperManager.releaseHelper();
super.tearDown();
}
public void testDetailDiscount() {
//Example code using an entity class that encapsulates ormlite functionality
double total = 95 * 5;
DocumentDetail detail = DocumentDetail.create(getActivity());
assertEquals(total, detail.getTotal());
}
}
Hope it helps
I use Robolectric for unit testing Android apps. Works fine with RoboGuice and Ormlite. Robolectric creates its own database, so a unit test doesn't modify the database on the device you are testing with.
If this doesn't answer your question, please clarify your question. Like, how is not using a separate database related to using mock dao's?