I'm on .NET 4.6.2 and using the following versions of the assemblies via Nuget:
Service
Autofac - 4.8.1
Autofac.Extras.AggregateService - 4.1.0
Autofac.Wcf - 4.1.0
Castle.Core - 4.3.1
Tests
Autofac.Extras.Moq - 4.3.0
Moq - 4.10.1
The setup I'm using for the host container is exactly like the "Getting Started" example from the Docs and you end up with a proxy generated from DynamicProxy, and this works well by eliminating the constructor overloads.
When it comes to unit testing the services that use this type of injection I seem to be stumbling on how to mock it out properly.
I've spent a few hours trying various approaches and none of them have panned out. Here's basically what I have:
public interface IMyAggregateService
{
IFirstService FirstService { get; }
ISecondService SecondService { get; }
IThirdService ThirdService { get; }
IFourthService FourthService { get; }
}
public class SomeController
{
private readonly IMyAggregateService _aggregateService;
public SomeController(IMyAggregateService aggregateService)
{
_aggregateService = aggregateService;
}
}
using (var mock = AutoMock.GetLoose())
{
//var depends = mock.Mock<IMyAggregateService>().SetupAllProperties(); //Not working
//depends.SetupProperty(p => p.IFirstService, ?? );
//depends.SetupProperty(p => p.ISecondService, ?? );
//depends.SetupProperty(p => p.IThirdService, ?? );
//depends.SetupProperty(p => p.IFourthService, ?? );
var sut = mock.Create<SomeController>();
Action action = () => sut.SomeAction();
action.Should().xxxx
}
So the first problem I had was that there are no setters on the IMyAggregateService so the SetupProperty method won't work. When I used SetupAllProperties, everything was null at run-time, so that won't work. I even pulled down the Autofac.Extras.AggregateService code and was checking out the Test project, but there's really nothing I can gleam from it that might help, except the AggregateServiceGenerator might be useful at some point.
So my questions is,
"How do I properly mock an aggregate service, and provide behaviors for it during unit testing?"
For extra credit I'd like to know also how to provide a specific implementation of any of the dependencies that are properties, like this:
using (var mock = AutoMock.GetLoose())
{
mock.Provide<IFirstService>(this.MyImplProperty);
"How do I properly mock an aggregate service, and provide behaviors
for it during unit testing?"
Try to do smth like this (it is not using automoq just a moq :))
var firstServiceImpl= new Mock<IFirstService>();
var secondServiceImp2= new Mock<ISecondService>();
var myAggregateServie= new Mock<IMyAggregateService>();
myAggregateServie.SetupGet(x => x.FirstService ).Returns(firstServiceImpl);
myAggregateServie.SetupGet(x => x.SecondService ).Returns(secondServiceImp2);
.
.
.
And then you can mock behaviours of your services, and verify calls, some pseudo code will look like this.
//Mock as above
//Mock service behavior
firstServiceImpl.Setup(m=>m.Method1()).Returns(1)
//test method of you controller, lets assume that the method1 of controller
//is only calling firstService method named Method1()
var result = SampleController.Method1();
Assert.IsTrue( result == 1)
firstService.Verify(m=>m.Method1(), Times.Once()).
Related
C# method where I am using IMapper interface
foreach (var req in listRequestMasters)
{
var customReq = _mapper.Map<GridModel>(req);
}
by below line of code getting success assertion but not as expected result, the one record getting twice
_mockMapper.Setup(x => x.Map<GridModel>(It.IsAny<RequestMaster>())).Returns(requestGridModelMockData.FirstOrDefault());
and by below line of code getting
Message:
Moq.MockException : IMapperBase.Map(RequestMaster)
invocation failed with mock behavior Strict. All invocations on the
mock must have a corresponding setup.
_mockMapper.Setup(x => x.Map<List<GridModel>>(It.IsAny<RequestMaster>())).Returns(requestGridModelMockData);
remaining code
var result = await Service.GetHistoryRequestDetails(historyVMMockData);
Assert.Equal(JsonConvert.SerializeObject(requestGridModelMockData), JsonConvert.SerializeObject(result));
AutoMapper is a library that is already well tested on its own. So you should use the AutoMapper library also in your tests and not mock it, because you want to test your code and not others library code (or do you have also self written tests for ASP core, EF or something similar?).
In most environments you manage your mapping within individual Profiles. If not, you should do so and create within your test a fresh mapper (preferable in constructor) and use it as usual.
For example you have some DTOs:
public class Source
{
public string Name { get; set; }
}
public class Destination
{
public string Name { get; set; }
}
And somewhere else you defined the AutoMapper mappings:
public class MyProfile : Profile
{
public MyProfile()
{
CreateMap<Source, Destination>();
}
}
Then within your test class you do something like this:
public class MyTests
{
private readonly IMapper mapper;
public MyTests()
{
var config = new MapperConfiguration(cfg => cfg.AddProfile<MyProfile>());
var mapper = config.CreateMapper();
}
[Fact]
public void TestSomething()
{
var source = new Source { Name = "foo" };
var sut = new SystemUnderTest(mapper);
var result = sut.DoSomething(source);
var expected = mapper.Map<Dest>(source);
Assert.Equal(expected, result, DestinationComparer.Default);
}
}
As you can see, the system under test receives the real mapper (even if you just care for an IMapper interface). You don't create a mock, stub, puppet, you name it for 3rd party libraries. You use the real implemenations, because you write tests for your code.
Maybe it makes sense to write tests checking if a 3rd party library works as expected, which helps narrow problems down when upgrading a library and still behaves the same. But these tests don't use anything of your code and just tests some library function:
[Fact]
public void CheckMapperMapsCorrectly()
{
var source = new Source { Name = "Foo" };
var dest = mapper.Map<Destination>(source);
Assert.Equal(source.Name, dest.Name);
}
But that is something different and fully optional, depending on how much you trust each 3rd party library or makes sense if you already fall into that pit on an upgrade of a 3rd party library to avoid the same problem on next update.
public void Pay()
{
// some insert db code
// ...
// Call Bank api
BankApi api = new BankApi();
int result = api.pay();
if(result == 1)
{
//...
}
else
{
//...
}
}
I dont want to call api in unit test. How to mock the pay method without modify inner code (such as the line new BankApi() code)?
Its possible to mock your BankApi class without changing any of your legacy code, you just need a unit testing framework that allows you to mock concrete classes.
for example a test for your method with Typemock :
[TestMethod]
public void ExampleTest()
{
//fakes the next BankApi instace
var handler = Isolate.Fake.NextInstance<BankApi>();
//change the pay method behavior
Isolate.WhenCalled(() => handler.pay()).WillReturn(1);
new ClassUnderTest().Pay();
}
First, as stated, you should create an Interface.
public interface IBankApi
{
int pay();
}
Then, what you can do is mock this interface like this (I'm using Moq "Mock you" here, you will need to add the NuGet package "Moq" as reference to your application, and you could use other mocking libraries of course)
apiMock = new Mock<IBankApi>();
just after that you will tell what this call should return (that would be actual mocking)
apiMock.Setup(x => x.pay()).Returns(1); //
Then, this api "pseudo object", can be used by using apiMock.Object
Now , this information I just gave you doesn't directly solve your problem.
As stated in the comments, you need a better uncoupling of your code.
You need, for example, some kind of "dependency injection" to allow for such a uncoupling.
Here is a simple example of how it can be done :
public class ClassThatUsesYourBankApi
{
private readonly IBankApi _api;
// the constructor will be given a reference to the interface
public ClassThatUsesYourBankApi (IBankApi api)
{
// here you could check for null parameter and throw exception as needed
this._api = api;
}
// this method can now be tested with the mock interface
public void MethodThatUseTheApi()
{
int result = this._api.pay();
if (result == 1)
{
// some things that happens
}
else
{
// some other thing
}
}
}
How to unit test that method :
using Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting;
using Moq;
[TestClass]
public class TestMyMethod
{
[TestMethod]
public void MyMethod_WithBankApiReturns1_ShouldHaveThingsThatHappens()
{
// Arrange
var apiMock = new Mock<IBankApi>();
apiMock.Setup(api => api.pay())
.Returns(1);
var myObject = new ClassThatUsesYourBankApi(apiMock.Object);
// Act
int result = myObject.MethodThatUseTheApi();
// Assert
// Here you test that the things that should have happened when the api returns 1 actually have happened.
}
}
The key thing to understand here, is that you must not instantiate the api you need to mock in the method you want to test
In other words, "uncoupling" your method with your api is done by programming to an interface, and code such as you don't have
var api = new BankApi()
directly in the method you want to unit test.
I showed a way to do that, and there are other.
I recently took a .Net project over which exposes DAOs from a Microsoft SQL Database via ServiceStack(3.9.71) REST API. Since I am gonna refactor some parts I want to unit test (at least) all servicestack services. For a better understanding I quickly draft how the implementation works.
Each Service contains a property of type DBService which encapsulates all database accesses of all services. Unfortunately this is a concrete class which makes it hard to mock. The DI.Container wrappes ServiceStack's IOC.
public class SomeService : Service
{
public DBService { get { return DI.Container.Resolve<DBService>(); } }
public object Get(SomeDataClass class)
{
var response = DBService.SomeServiceGet();
return response;
}
// other code omitted
}
The DBService looks like this (draft):
public class DBService
{
public IDbConnectionFactory DBFactory { get { return DI.Container.Resolve<IDbConnectionFactory>(); } }
public SomeServiceResponse SomeServiceGet()
{
//DB Access here...
// ...
}
public SomeOtherServiceResponse SomeOtherServiceGet()
{
//...
}
// following about 30 other methods for all the services (POST,GET,PUT etc)
}
I read the detailed response to this question but I was not able to create and initialize a BasicAppHost in ServiceStack 3.9.71 since it immediately threw a System.TypeLoadExceptionMethod 'get_VirtualPathProvider'.
On the other hand I was thinking that I do not actually need a BasicAppHost. I just have to unit test the DBService and then the servicestack services with a somehow mocked DBService. The only problem I have is that DBService is not an interface and that I am actually not sure how to deal (mock) with the SQL database and the IOC.
[UPDATE]
Unfortunately I am still not able to test a service since I can not just new the service in my test. If I do so I get:
System.TypeLoadExceptionCould not load type 'ServiceStack.ServiceHost.IService' from assembly
Here is my test:
[Fact]
public void SomeDataTest()
{
var serviceUnderTest = new SomeService();
var response = serviceUnderTest.Get(new SomeDataClass());
Assert.NotNull(response);
}
I guess the problem is that the services strongly uses alot of properties which are injected via the IOC. How can I mock that? Creating a BasicAppHost and retrieving the service from there also does not work which I already mentioned.
If you are just testing your service class, then you can directly mock any dependencies:
[Fact]
public void SomeDataTest(
{
var serviceUnderTest = new SomeService();
var logger = new Mock<ILogger>(); // Rhino mocks fashion.
serviceUnderTest.Logger = logger.Object;
var response = serviceUnderTest.Get(new SomeDataClass());
Assert.NotNull(response);
}
There's an page in their older docs here about integration testing in case you want to test the AppHost
Edit: there's an example of mocking the service dependencies here.
-------Please see updates below as I now have this set up for dependency injection and the use of the MOQ mocking framework. I'd still like to split up my repository so it doesn't directly depend on pulling the windowsUser within the same function.
I have a Web API in an intranet site that populates a dropdown. The query behind the dropdown takes the windows username as a parameter to return the list.
I realize I don't have all of this set up correctly because I'm not able to unit test it. I need to know how this "should" be set up to allow unit testing and then what the unit tests should look like.
Additional info: this is an ASP.NET MVC 5 application.
INTERFACE
public interface ITestRepository
{
HttpResponseMessage DropDownList();
}
REPOSITORY
public class ExampleRepository : IExampleRepository
{
//Accessing the data through Entity Framework
private MyDatabaseEntities db = new MyDatabaseEntities();
public HttpResponseMessage DropDownList()
{
//Get the current windows user
string windowsUser = HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name;
//Pass the parameter to a procedure running a select query
var sourceQuery = (from p in db.spDropDownList(windowsUser)
select p).ToList();
string result = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(sourceQuery);
var response = new HttpResponseMessage();
response.Content = new StringContent(result, System.Text.Encoding.Unicode, "application/json");
return response;
}
}
CONTROLLER
public class ExampleController : ApiController
{
private IExampleRepository _exampleRepository;
public ExampleController()
{
_exampleRepository = new ExampleRepository();
}
[HttpGet]
public HttpResponseMessage DropDownList()
{
try
{
return _exampleRepository.DropDownList();
}
catch
{
throw new HttpResponseException(new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.NotFound));
}
}
}
UPDATE 1
I have updated my Controller based on BartoszKP's suggestion to show dependency injection.
UPDATED CONTROLLER
public class ExampleController : ApiController
{
private IExampleRepository _exampleRepository;
//Dependency Injection
public ExampleController(IExampleRepository exampleRepository)
{
_exampleRepository = exampleRepository;
}
[HttpGet]
public HttpResponseMessage DropDownList()
{
try
{
return _exampleRepository.DropDownList();
}
catch
{
throw new HttpResponseException(new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.NotFound));
}
}
}
UPDATE 2
I have decided to use MOQ as a mocking framework for unit testing. I'm able to test something simple, like the following. This would test a simple method that doesn't take any parameters and doesn't include the windowsUser part.
[TestMethod]
public void ExampleOfAnotherTest()
{
//Arrange
var mockRepository = new Mock<IExampleRepository>();
mockRepository
.Setup(x => x.DropDownList())
.Returns(new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.OK));
ExampleController controller = new ExampleController(mockRepository.Object);
controller.Request = new HttpRequestMessage();
controller.Configuration = new HttpConfiguration();
//Act
var response = controller.DropDownList();
//Assert
Assert.AreEqual(HttpStatusCode.OK, response.StatusCode);
}
I need help testing the DropDownList method (one that does include code to get the windowsUser). I need advice on how to break this method apart. I know both parts shouldn't been in the same method. I don't know how to arrange splitting out the windowsUser variable. I realize this really should be brought in as a parameter, but I can't figure out how.
You usually do not unit-test repositories (integration tests verify if they really persist the data in the database correctly) - see for example this article on MSDN:
Typically, it is difficult to unit test the repositories themselves, so it is often better to write integration tests for them.
So, let's focus on testing only the controller.
Change the controller to take IExampleRepository in its constructor as a parameter:
private IExampleRepository _exampleRepository;
public ExampleController(IExampleRepository exampleRepository)
{
_exampleRepository = exampleRepository;
}
Then, in your unit tests, use one of mocking frameworks (such as RhinoMock for example) to create a stub for the sole purpose of testing the controller.
[TestFixture]
public class ExampleTestFixture
{
private IExampleRepository CreateRepositoryStub(fake data)
{
var exampleRepositoryStub = ...; // create the stub with a mocking framework
// make the stub return given fake data
return exampleRepositoryStub;
}
[Test]
public void GivenX_WhenDropDownListIsRequested_ReturnsY()
{
// Arrange
var exampleRepositoryStub = CreateRepositoryStub(X);
var exampleController = new ExampleController(exampleRepositoryStub);
// Act
var result = exampleController.DropDownList();
// Assert
Assert.That(result, Is.Equal(Y));
}
}
This is just a quick&dirty example - CreateRepositoryStub method should be of course extracted to some test utility class. Perhaps it should return a fluent interface to make the test's Arrange section more readable on what is given. Something more like:
// Arrange
var exampleController
= GivenAController()
.WithFakeData(X);
(with better names that reflect your business logic of course).
In case of ASP.NET MVC, the framework needs to know how to construct the controller. Fortunately, ASP.NET supports the Dependency Injection paradigm and a parameterless constructor is not required when using MVC unity.
Also, note the comment by Richard Szalay:
You shouldn't use HttpContext.Current in WebApi - you can use base.User which comes from HttpRequestBase.User and is mockable. If you really want to continue using HttpContext.Current, take a look at Mock HttpContext.Current in Test Init Method
One trick that I find very useful when trying to make old code testable when said code is accessing some global static or other messy stuff that I can't easily just parameterize is to wrap access to the resource in a virtual method call. Then you can subclass your system under test and use that in the unit test instead.
Example, using a hard dependency in the System.Random class
public class Untestable
{
public int CalculateSomethingRandom()
{
return new Random().Next() + new Random().Next();
}
}
Now we replace var rng = new Random();
public class Untestable
{
public int CalculateSomethingRandom()
{
return GetRandomNumber() + GetRandomNumber();
}
protected virtual int GetRandomNumber()
{
return new Random().Next();
}
}
Now we can create a testable version of the class:
public class Testable : Untestable
{
protected override int GetRandomNumber()
{
// You can return whatever you want for your test here,
// it depends on what type of behaviour you are faking.
// You can easily inject values here via a constructor or
// some public field in the subclass. You can also add
// counters for times method was called, save the args etc.
return 4;
}
}
The drawback with this method is that you can't use (most) isolation frameworks to implement protected methods (easily), and for good reason, since protected methods are sort of internal and shouldn't be all that important to your unit tests. It's still a really handy way of getting things covered with tests so you can refactor them, instead of having to spend 10 hours without tests, trying to do major architectual changes to your code before you get to "safety".
Just another tool to keep in mind, I find it comes in handy from time to time!
EDIT: More concretely, in your case you might want to create a protected virtual string GetLoggedInUserName(). This will technically speaking keep the actual call to HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name untested, but you will have isolated it to the simplest smallest possible method, so you can test that the code is calling the correct method the right amount of times with the correct args, and then you simply have to know that HttpContext.Current.User.Identity.Name contains what you want. This can later be refactored into some sort of user manager or logged in user provider, you'll see what suits best as you go along.
I have a MVC3 project that uses property injection. Within my controllers I make a call to a service class. As I mentioned it uses property injection (with unity) instead of resolving this through the constructor. I have searched all over trying to find an example of a unit test that resolves these dependencies within my controller but everything seems to refer to constructer DI. I’m getting frustrated. Any help would be great.
Example of Controller:
[Dependency]
public ITrainingService trainingService { get; set; }
public ActionResult Index(MyTrainingView myTrainingView)
{
//Load all training items into view object
myTrainingView.training = trainingService.getTraining(myTrainingView.trainingId);
myTrainingView.videos = trainingService.getTrainingVideos(myTrainingView.trainingId);
myTrainingView.visuals = trainingService.getTrainingVisuals(myTrainingView.trainingId);
myTrainingView.exams = trainingService.getTrainingExams(myTrainingView.trainingId);
return View(myTrainingView);
}
I'm trying to resolve the trainingService when running my unit test. I have found countless examples for mocking and resolving dependencies using constructor dependency but nothing when it comes to property injection.
You don't need to rely on unity in your unit tests.
Something like this would do the trick:
[Test]
public void GetTrainingById()
{
var mockService = MockRepository.GenerateMock<ITrainingService>();
mockService.Stub(service => service.getTraining(123)).Return(new ImaginaryClass());
var sut = new TrainingController();
sut.trainingService = mockService;
var myTrainingView = new MyTrainingView();
sut.Index(myTrainingView);
Assert.AreEqual(expected, myTrainingView.training);
}
If you must use unity in your unit tests, you could just instantiate the UnityContainer in your test and use the RegisterInstance to register the objects you want to inject.