*wouldn't* inherit IFileSystem on ClassA
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Chris Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Congrats, Jake!
> Just a friendly hint. I would inherit IFileSystem on ClassA. I would make
> it a dependency (composition over inheritance.). This will result in a much
> cleaner code-base and test.
>
> Example:
>
> public class ClassA: baseClass
> {
> public bool Success;
> private readonly IFileSystem fileSystem;
>
> public ClassA(IFileSystem fileSystem)
> {
> this.fileSystem = fileSystem;
> }
>
> protected override void ProcessItem(int i)
> {
> string fileName = "test " + i.ToString() + ".test";
> Success = fileSystem.FileExists(fileName);
> }
> }
>
> ...
> [TestInitialize]
> public void MyTestInitialize()
> {
> _mocks = new MockRepository();
> fileSystem = _mocks.DynamicMock<IFileSystem>();
> _classMock = new ClassA_Accessor(fileSystem);
>
> }
>
> [TestMethod]
> public void TestMethod1()
> {
> Expect.Call(fileSystem.FileExists("")).IgnoreArguments().Return(true);
> _mocks.ReplayAll();
>
> _classMock.ProcessItem(1);
>
> Assert.AreEqual(true, _classMock.Success);
> }
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Jake <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> Ok, I declared this in main project:
>> public interface IFileSystem
>> {
>> bool FileExists(string filePath);
>> }
>>
>> I've changed implementation on ClassA to following:
>> public class ClassA:baseClass, IFileSystem
>> {
>> public bool FileExists(string filePath)
>> {
>> return File.Exists(filePath);
>> }
>> ...
>>
>> Now, I would still need to access protected method through
>> ClassA_AccessorManualClass, as such I've changed the test to
>> following:
>> [TestInitialize()]
>> public void MyTestInitialize() {
>> _mocks = new MockRepository();
>> _classManualAccessorMock =
>> _mocks.PartialMultiMock<ClassA_AccessorManualClass>(typeof
>> (IFileSystem));
>> }
>> //
>> // Use TestCleanup to run code after each test has run
>> [TestCleanup()]
>> public void MyTestCleanup() {
>> _mocks.VerifyAll();
>> }
>> //
>> #endregion
>>
>> [TestMethod]
>> public void TestProcessItem()
>> {
>> IFileSystem fs = _classManualAccessorMock;
>> Expect.Call(fs.FileExists(null)).IgnoreArguments().Return
>> (true);
>> _mocks.ReplayAll();
>> _classManualAccessorMock.ProcessItem(1);
>> Assert.AreEqual(true, _classManualAccessorMock.Success);
>> Assert.AreEqual("test 1.test",
>> _classManualAccessorMock.FileName);
>> }
>>
>> And it is passing now!
>>
>> Thank you everyone.
>>
>> On Mar 24, 4:45 pm, Tim Barcz <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > You can then mock IFileSystem.FileExists to return true or false,
>> allowing
>> > you to
>> >
>> > 1. Not rely on the physical file system where the tests are running
>> > 2. Tests both paths through this method (1) the file exists 2) the
>> file
>> > doesn't exist and make sure the behavior you want to happen IS in
>> fact
>> > happening.
>> >
>> > Tim
>> >
>> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Jake <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > What would I gain by astracting away the interface? If need test to
>> > > execute something before the call to FileExists and after the call to
>> > > FileExists then how having interface changes anything?
>> >
>> > > On Mar 24, 4:37 pm, Chris Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > > Maybe to abstract it away as IFileSystem?
>> > > > Unfortunately, I really couldn't tell you the best way to do such a
>> thing
>> > > > without knowing your project.
>> >
>> > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Jake <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > Ok, I understand that having FileExists as separate method is
>> "code
>> > > > > smell", but regardless of that if I need to test functionality
>> that is
>> > > > > depended on File.Exists (FileInfo.Exists is another alternative
>> I've
>> > > > > tried to use) how can you test that?
>> >
>> > > > > On Mar 24, 4:31 pm, Chris Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > > > > You really can't unless you completely mock every call in the
>> chain.
>> > > > > Which
>> > > > > > would invalidate any test.
>> > > > > > I'd take this as a sign that your design isn't sound. :(
>> >
>> > > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 12:57 PM, Jake <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > So how can I mock that underlying object to test the
>> functionality
>> > > in
>> > > > > > > ProcessItem?
>> >
>> > > > > > > On Mar 24, 3:39 pm, Chris Martin <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > Looking under the hood, this is what I can determine:
>> > > > > > > > MSTest is generating a proxy to the real object under test.
>> It's
>> > > only
>> > > > > > > doing
>> > > > > > > > this to be able to call the real object. Guess what? The
>> real
>> > > object
>> > > > > in
>> > > > > > > turn
>> > > > > > > > calls FileExists, which isn't mocked. The result you're
>> seing is
>> > > the
>> > > > > > > result
>> > > > > > > > of File.Exists in Sys.IO.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Jake <[email protected]>
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > ClassA_Accessor gets generated on runtime and makes
>> otherwise
>> > > > > "hidden"
>> > > > > > > > > methods and members available for testing. And Yes it is
>> used
>> > > by
>> > > > > > > > > MSTest only.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > On Mar 24, 3:31 pm, Chris Martin <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > What is ClassA_Accessor?
>> > > > > > > > > > Is this some "trick" that MSTest relies on?
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Jake <
>> [email protected]>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > It's in Files in the RhinoMock Group (look on the
>> > > right-side)
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 24, 3:25 pm, Chris Martin <
>> [email protected]>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > > > Where is that zip file?
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Jake <
>> > > [email protected]>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > I uploaded ProtectedMethodCase.zip into files (It
>> works
>> > > in
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > VisualStudio 2008 with Microsoft Test Framework).
>> I
>> > > > > implemented
>> > > > > > > the
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > test using the PartialMock as was suggested
>> earlier.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 24, 3:20 pm, Tim Barcz <[email protected]
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > It wasn't AAA, I was trying to clarify aruond
>> > > PartialMock
>> > > > > but
>> > > > > > > I
>> > > > > > > > > think
>> > > > > > > > > > > I
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > only
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > muddied the waters....
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Tuna Toksoz <
>> > > > > > > [email protected]>
>> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I didin't realize it was AAA syntax, because I
>> saw
>> > > > > > > ReplayAll,
>> > > > > > > > > and
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > though
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the record/replay mode.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tuna Toksöz
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Eternal sunshine of the open source mind.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >http://devlicio.us/blogs/tuna_toksoz
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >http://tunatoksoz.com
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >http://twitter.com/tehlike
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Chris Martin
>> <
>> > > > > > > > > > > [email protected]
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> This won't even compile.
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Your methods are protected.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Change them to public and this following
>> passes.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> ---
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> public class ClassA
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> {
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> public bool Success;
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> public virtual bool FileExists(string
>> > > > > filename)
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> {
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> return File.Exists(filename);
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> }
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> public virtual void Process(string
>> > > filename)
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> {
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Success = FileExists(filename);
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> }
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> }
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> [TestFixture]
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> public class Tests
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> {
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> [Test]
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> public void process_test()
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> {
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> var mocks = new MockRepository();
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> var a =
>> mocks.PartialMock<ClassA>();
>> >
>> > > Expect.Call(a.FileExists(null)).IgnoreArguments().Return(true);
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> mocks.ReplayAll();
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> a.Process("test.test");
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Assert.AreEqual(a.Success, true);
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> }
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> }
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Jake <
>> > > > > [email protected]
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Sorry, for this mistake, but method is
>> virtual!
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Here is more info:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> public class classA: baseClass
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> {
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> public bool Success;
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> protected virtual bool FileExists(string
>> > > fileName)
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> {
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> return File.Exists(fileName);
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> }
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> protected virtual void Process(string
>> fileName)
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> {
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> //Do something
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> if(FileExists(fileName))
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> {
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Success = true;
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> }
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> else
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> {
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Success = false;
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> }
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> }
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> }
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Unit test:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> [TestMethod]
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> public void ProcessTest()
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> {
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> var a = _mocks.StrickMock<baseClass>();
>> >
>> > > > > Expect.Call(a.FileExists(null)).IgnoreArguments().Return(true);
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> _mocks.ReplayAll();
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> a.Process("test.test"); //File doesn't
>> exists
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Assert.AreEqual(true, a.Success); //Fails
>> here
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> }
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> On Mar 24, 1:39 pm, Alex McMahon <
>> > > > > [email protected]>
>> > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > Method2 must be a virtual method for
>> RhinoMocks
>> > > to
>> > > > > be
>> > > > > > > able
>> > > > > > > > > to
>> > > > > > > > > > > mock
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > the
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > method with a PartialMock,
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Jake <
>> > > > > > > [email protected]>
>> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > Ayende,
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > I am trying to use Rhino Mocks in
>> following
>> > > > > scenario:
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > void classA.Method1()
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > {
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > //some stuff
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > if(classA.Method2(var))
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > {
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > //Do something
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > }
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > else
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > {
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > //Do something else
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > }
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > //some other stuff
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > }
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > Now, I created partial mock for the
>> class and
>> > > set
>> > > > > > > > > expectation
>> > > > > > > > > > > for
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > Method2 like so:
>> >
>> > > > >
>> Expect.Call(classAMock.Method2(null)).IgnoreArguments().Return(true);
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > Real implementation of the method
>> returns
>> > > false.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > When I execute the test it goes through
>> the
>> > > path
>> > > > > when
>> > > > > > > > > Method2
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > returns
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > false.
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > How can that be?
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> --
>> >
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Charles Kettering - "My interest is in the
>> future
>> > > > > because
>> > > > > > > I
>> > > > > > > > > am
>> > > > > > > > > > > going
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > to
>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> spend the rest of my life there."
>> >
>> > ...
>> >
>> > read more »
>> >>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> George Burns - "Don't stay in bed, unless you can make money in bed."
>
--
Charles Kettering - "My interest is in the future because I am going to
spend the rest of my life there."
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Rhino.Mocks" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/RhinoMocks?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
