How to unit test constructor when using nested test classes - c#

Assuming I have some logic in a class constructor that I wish to unit test, how would I structure it if I am using xUnit.net and nested test classes for each method?
using Xunit;
public class MyClass
{
public MyClass()
{
// Some logic to test
}
public int GetResult()
{
return 123;
}
}
public class MyClassFacts
{
// How to test MyClass constructor?
// Nested classes to test each of MyClass' methods
public class GetResult
{
[Fact]
public void IsCorrect()
{
var myClass = new MyClass();
int result = myClass.GetResult();
Assert.Equal(123, result);
}
// Other tests for MyClass.GetResult()...
}
}

You're already testing it in your IsCorrect() test technically but if you want an explicit test:
using Xunit;
public class MyClass
{
public MyClass()
{
// Some logic to test
}
public int GetResult()
{
return 123;
}
}
public class MyClassFacts
{
[Fact]
public void Ctor()
{
var myClass = new MyClass();
Assert.NotNull(myClass);
// Any other asserts you require
}
// Nested classes to test each of MyClass' methods
public class GetResult
{
[Fact]
public void IsCorrect()
{
var myClass = new MyClass();
int result = myClass.GetResult();
Assert.Equal(123, result);
}
// Other tests for MyClass.GetResult()...
}
}

Related

Partial mock methods in a class using Autofixture, Moq and XUnit

I want to mock only some methods of a class and call the real implementation for other methods.
I have my sut class Test where the Runner class is injected in the constructor. This injected class has again a injected other class RunnerParam in the constructor.
The code is a simplified case of my real classes in trying to have only the basics.
[Fact]
public void Test()
{
var fixture = new Fixture().Customize(new AutoMoqCustomization());
var paramMock = fixture.Freeze<Mock<IRunnerParam>>();
paramMock.Setup(x => x.Multiplicator()).Returns(2);
var classMock = fixture.Freeze<Mock<IRunner>>();
classMock.Setup(x => x.Run()).Returns(5);
var test = fixture.Create<Test>();
var result = test.StartRunning(); // should be 5
var result2 = test.StartRunningImplementation(5); // should be 500
}
Supporting members
public interface IRunnerParam
{
int Multiplicator();
}
public class RunnerParam : IRunnerParam
{
public virtual int Multiplicator()
{
return 20;
}
}
public interface IRunner
{
int Run();
int RunImplementation(int param);
}
public class Runner : IRunner
{
protected virtual RunnerParam MultiParam { get; set; }
public Runner(RunnerParam multiParam)
{
MultiParam = multiParam;
}
public virtual int Run()
{
return 10;
}
public int RunImplementation(int param)
{
return 10 * MultiParam.Multiplicator() * param * Run();
}
}
public class Test
{
private readonly IRunner _runner;
public Test(IRunner runner)
{
_runner = runner;
}
public int StartRunning()
{
return _runner.Run();
}
public int StartRunningImplementation(int param)
{
return _runner.RunImplementation(param);
}
}
I want to mock and give a mocked value to the method Run in the class Runner, but to use the real implementation of the method RunImplementation.
I would expect to see for result2 500, but it's 0, meaning that the method is not seen as mocked up. In my eyes that is correct, but the Moq callbase is equal to true, so the real implementation should be taken, but it isn't.
What am I missing here?
In the shown simplified example, Test is only dependent on IRunner
private readonly IRunner _runner;
public Test(IRunner runner)
{
_runner = runner;
}
So that is all that needs to be mocked if the intention was to test Test class in isolation.
//...
var classMock = fixture.Freeze<Mock<IRunner>>();
classMock.Setup(x => x.Run()).Returns(5);
classMock.Setup(x => x.RunImplementation(It.IsAny<int>())).Returns(500);
//...
If Runner class is to be also tested in isolation, then a mocked RunnerParam would be needed to satisfy its dependencies.
It should however be dependent on the abstraction (interface) and not the concretion (implementation).
protected virtual IRunnerParam MultiParam { get; set; }
public Runner(IRunnerParam multiParam) {
MultiParam = multiParam;
}
This simplifies the isolated test as described in the original question
I want to mock and give a mocked value to the method Run in the class Runner, but to use the real implementation of the method RunImplementation.
//Arrange
var fixture = new Fixture().Customize(new AutoMoqCustomization());
var runnerParam = fixture.Freeze<Mock<IRunnerParam>>()
.Setup(_ => _.Multiplicator())
.Returns(2);
var subjectMock = fixture.Freeze<Mock<Runner>>();
subjectMock.CallBase = true;
subjectMock.Setup(_ => _.Run()).Returns(5);
int expected = 500;
Runner sut = subjectMock.Object;
//Act
var actual = sut.RunImplementation(5); // should be 500
//Assert
actual.Should().Be(expected);

Assert and Verify both fail

Please see the code below:
[TestClass]
public class UnitTest1
{
Moq.Mock<ISayGoodMorning> GoodMorningMock;
[TestInitialize]
public void init()
{
GoodMorningMock = new Moq.Mock<ISayGoodMorning>();
GoodMorningMock.Setup(x => x.GoodMorning()).Returns(Test());
}
[TestMethod]
public void TestMethod1()
{
GoodMorningMock.Verify(x => x.GoodMorning(), Times.Once());
Assert.AreEqual(g.SayGreeting(), "Hola");
}
public string Test()
{
return "Hola";
}
}
The assert and the verify fail. Why is that? Here is the code that is tested:
namespace ClassLibrary1
{
public class SayGoodMorning : ISayGoodMorning
{
public string GoodMorning()
{
return "Good Morning";
}
}
public interface ISayGoodMorning
{
string GoodMorning();
}
}
namespace ClassLibrary2
{
public class Greeting
{
public string SayGreeting()
{
ISayGoodMorning s = new SayGoodMorning();
return s.GoodMorning();
}
}
}
First the subject under test needs to be refactored to inject the dependency to allow a mock to be used when testing. Either via constructor or method injection. (Explicit Dependencies Principle)
This example uses constructor injection
namespace ClassLibrary2 {
public class Greeting {
private readonly ISayGoodMorning speaker;
public Greeting(ISayGoodMorning speaker) {
this.speaker = speaker;
}
public string SayGreeting() {
return speaker.GoodMorning();
}
}
}
Next the test needs to be restructured so that the Verify is done after exercising the method under test;
[TestClass]
public class UnitTest1 {
Mock<ISayGoodMorning> GoodMorningMock;
[TestInitialize]
public void init() {
//Arrange
GoodMorningMock = new Mock<ISayGoodMorning>();
GoodMorningMock.Setup(_ => _.GoodMorning()).Returns(Test());
}
[TestMethod]
public void TestMethod1() {
//Arrange cont'd
var g = new ClassLibrary2.Greeting(GoodMorningMock.Object);
var expected = "Hola";
//Act
var actual = g.SayGreeting();
//Assert
GoodMorningMock.Verify(_ => _.GoodMorning(), Times.Once());
Assert.AreEqual(expected, actual);
}
public string Test() {
return "Hola";
}
}

Mock certain part of the method using Moq

I'm new to Moq and I would like to mock certain part of my method to test the business logic but having problem to mock the GetCountry method. Below is the code that I used as sample.
public class Class1
{
public void Process()
{
MyClass foo = new MyClass();
var o = foo.GetCountry(); //I would like to mock this part.
//Business Logic here
}
}
public class MyClass : IFoo
{
public List<string> GetCountry()
{
//Get the data from Database.. someone will do this
throw new NotImplementedException();
}
}
Below is my Test Code that I used.
[TestMethod]
public void TestMethod2()
{
var mock = new Moq.Mock<IFoo>();
mock.Setup(m => m.GetCountry()).Returns(new List<string> { "America", "Philippines", "Japan" });
ClassLibrary1.Class1 foo = new ClassLibrary1.Class1();
//still called the not implemented exception
foo.Process();
}
Your code currently doesn't have an easy way to replace one implementation to another. Try this approach:
public class Class1
{
// Instead of using a concrete class, use an interface
// also, promote it to field
IFoo _foo;
// Create a constructor that accepts the interface
public Class1(IFoo foo)
{
_foo = foo;
}
// alternatively use constructor which provides a default implementation
public Class1() : this(new MyClass())
{
}
public void Process()
{
// Don't initialize foo variable here
var o = _foo.GetCountry();
//Business Logic here
}
}
If you have such setup it is quite easy to mock it using your code:
[TestMethod]
public void TestMethod2()
{
var mock = new Moq.Mock<IFoo>();
mock.Setup(m => m.GetCountry()).Returns(new List<string> { "America", "Philippines", "Japan" });
// Pass mocked object to your constructor:
ClassLibrary1.Class1 foo = new ClassLibrary1.Class1(mock.Object);
foo.Process();
}

Rhino mock AAA ExpectationViolationException

Getting Error while running rhinomock test method : Test method TestProject1.UnitTest2.TestMethod1 threw exception:
Rhino.Mocks.Exceptions.ExpectationViolationException: ITestInterface.Method1(5); Expected #1, Actual #0.
My code looks like:-
namespace ClassLibrary1
{
public interface ITestInterface
{
bool Method1(int x);
int Method(int a);
}
internal class TestClass : ITestInterface
{
public bool Method1(int x)
{
return true;
}
public int Method(int a)
{
return a;
}
}
}
And my test looks something like:-
using ClassLibrary1;
using Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting;
using Rhino.Mocks;
namespace TestProject1
{
[TestClass]
public class UnitTest2
{
[TestMethod]
public void TestMethod1()
{
ITestInterface mockProxy = MockRepository.GenerateMock<ITestInterface>();
TestClass tc = new TestClass();
bool result = tc.Method1(5);
Assert.IsTrue(result);
mockProxy.AssertWasCalled(x => x.Method1(5));
}
}
}
Any help appreciated.
You expect ITestInterface.Method1 to be called, but it never does.
You don't use your mockProxy at all in the test code - you just create it and you create your own instance, but there's no relation between the two of them.
Your TestClass is not dependant upon any interface that you want to mock, similar example that does use the mock would be:
internal class TestClass
{
private ITestInterface testInterface;
public TestClass(ITestInterface testInterface)
{
this.testInterface = testInterface;
}
public bool Method1(int x)
{
testInterface.Method1(x);
return true;
}
}
[TestClass]
public class UnitTest2
{
[TestMethod]
public void TestMethod1()
{
ITestInterface mockProxy = MockRepository.GenerateMock<ITestInterface>();
TestClass tc = new TestClass(mockProxy);
bool result = tc.Method1(5);
Assert.IsTrue(result);
mockProxy.AssertWasCalled(x => x.Method1(5));
}
}
I think you should read more about using Rhino Mocks, e.g. Rhino Mocks AAA Quick Start?

Rhino mocks stub vs expect, always choosing first one why?

I went with this solution:
Stubbing a property twice with rhino mocks
but even when I change both of my Stubs to .Expect, the first Expect is winning out:
Here's the recreation in mono:
using System;
using NUnit.Framework;
using Rhino.Mocks;
namespace FirstMonoClassLibrary
{
[TestFixture]
public class TestingRhinoMocks
{
Sut _systemUnderTest;
IFoo _dependency;
[SetUp]
public void Setup()
{
_dependency = MockRepository.GenerateMock<IFoo>();
_dependency.Expect(x => x.GetValue()).Return(1);
_systemUnderTest = new Sut(_dependency);
}
[Test]
public void Test()
{
_dependency.Stub(x => x.GetValue()).Return(2);
var value = _systemUnderTest.GetValueFromDependency();
Assert.AreEqual(2, value); // Fails says it's 1
}
}
public interface IFoo
{
int GetValue();
}
public class Sut
{
private readonly IFoo _foo;
public Sut(IFoo foo)
{
_foo = foo;
}
public int GetValueFromDependency()
{
return _foo.GetValue();
}
}
}
you need to do the following:
[Test]
public void Test()
{
_dependency.BackToRecord();
_dependency.Expect(_ => _.GetValue).Return(2);
_dependency.Replay();
var value = _systemUnderTest.GetValueFromDependency();
value.ShouldBe(2); // Fails says it's 1
}

Categories