[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Unit Testing EL in EJB-QL/HQL
I've been using SeamTest in integration mode (I'm not using setField for instance) and the em accepts seam parameters in EJB-QL. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4036731#4036731 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4036731 ___ jboss-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Unit Testing EL in EJB-QL/HQL
If you're using integration tests, Seam will proxy the EM. If you're writing a unit test, and creating your own EM from an EMF, you need to do: EntityManager em = new EntityManagerProxy( emf.createEntityManager() ); View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4036902#4036902 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4036902 ___ jboss-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Unit Testing EL in EJB-QL/HQL
Ok, in my unit test I originally had:
| EntityManager entityManager = emf.createEntityManager();
|
I have replaced it with:
| EntityManager entityManager = new EntityManagerProxy(
emf.createEntityManager() );
|
Now the exception is:
| java.lang.IllegalStateException: No application context active
| at org.jboss.seam.ScopeType.getContext(ScopeType.java:139)
| at org.jboss.seam.Component.getInstance(Component.java:1589)
| at org.jboss.seam.Component.getInstance(Component.java:1567)
| at org.jboss.seam.Component.getInstance(Component.java:1562)
| at org.jboss.seam.core.Expressions.instance(Expressions.java:219)
| at org.jboss.seam.persistence.QueryParser.(QueryParser.java:60)
| at org.jboss.seam.persistence.QueryParser.(QueryParser.java:33)
| at
org.jboss.seam.persistence.EntityManagerProxy.createQuery(EntityManagerProxy.java:57)
|
The class/method that I am attempting to unit test looks like:
| @Stateful
| @Scope(ScopeType.SESSION)
| @Name("userBrowser")
| @TransactionAttribute(TransactionAttributeType.REQUIRES_NEW)
| public class UserBrowserAction implements Serializable, UserBrowser {
|
| @Logger
| private Log log;
|
| @PersistenceContext
| private EntityManager entityManager;
|
| @DataModel
| private List users;
|
| @DataModelSelection(value = "users")
| private User selectedUser;
|
| @Factory("users")
| @Observer("newUserRegistered")
| @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
| public void getUsers() {
| log.debug("Invoke factory for users");
|
| this.users = this.entityManager.createQuery("from User user where
user.username <> #{currentUser.username} ").getResultList();
|
| log.debug("Found #0 users", this.users.size());
| }
|
| @Destroy
| @Remove
| public void destroy() {
| }
| }
|
My unit test is:
| public class UserBrowserTest extends SeamTest {
|
| @Test (groups = "unit")
| @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
| public void testGetUsers() throws Exception {
| EntityManagerFactory emf =
Persistence.createEntityManagerFactory("test-persistence-unit");
| EntityManager entityManager = new EntityManagerProxy(
emf.createEntityManager() );
|
| // create a log to inject
| Log log = Logging.getLog(UserBrowserAction.class);
|
| UserBrowser userBrowser = new UserBrowserAction();
|
| super.setField(userBrowser, "entityManager", entityManager);
| super.setField(userBrowser, "log", log);
|
| // invoke method
| userBrowser.getUsers();
|
| // inspect the property
| List users = (List) super.getField(userBrowser,
"users");
|
| assert users != null;
| assert users.size() == 2;
| }
| }
|
So my questions:
| * From the exception it looks like I may have to provide more than I am
currently via something in org.jboss.seam.mock.* e.g currentUser (In the
application currentUser is a session scoped component that is instantiated when
a user logs in). Are there any examples of using these mock objects anywhere?
| * Currently I am extending SeamTest which I understand is used for
integration testing. Is it incorrect to do this when unit testing; several of
the methods provided seem helpful in unit testing also. Would it be feasible to
override init so that the embedded container is not started for stand alone
unit test (or maybe have something like SeamUnitTest?
| * In general I seem to be having difficulties writing unit test because it
occurs over and over again that some method is accessing a variable that is
within scope during normal program executions e.g. in the code above
currentUser is within scope but is not injected into the component that is
accessing it. Is this bad practice? I tested re-writing the class that I am
trying to test to contain and instance of the currentUser object injected using
@In and then accessing that object from the method that performs the query and
this works, both in the application and in my unit test if I manually inject
that object.
| * Is it possible to manually inject objects into different scopes
programmatically for unit testing?
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4037218#4037218
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4037218
___
jboss-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Unit Testing EL in EJB-QL/HQL
"mrobinson28" wrote : | So my questions: | | | * From the exception it looks like I may have to provide more than I am currently via something in org.jboss.seam.mock.* e.g currentUser (In the application currentUser is a session scoped component that is instantiated when a user logs in). Are there any examples of using these mock objects anywhere? | | * Currently I am extending SeamTest which I understand is used for integration testing. Is it incorrect to do this when unit testing; several of the methods provided seem helpful in unit testing also. Would it be feasible to override init so that the embedded container is not started for stand alone unit test (or maybe have something like SeamUnitTest? | | * In general I seem to be having difficulties writing unit test because it occurs over and over again that some method is accessing a variable that is within scope during normal program executions e.g. in the code above currentUser is within scope but is not injected into the component that is accessing it. Is this bad practice? I tested re-writing the class that I am trying to test to contain and instance of the currentUser object injected using @In and then accessing that object from the method that performs the query and this works, both in the application and in my unit test if I manually inject that object. | | * Is it possible to manually inject objects into different scopes programmatically for unit testing? Did you ever figure out the answers to these excellent questions? I'm writing some unit tests and I'm running into some of your issues, especially the second issue (re: extending SeamTest for unit tests). I'm trying to avoid extending SeamTest in my unit tests. However, there's one nagging issue I have when doing this. Because the code I'm testing contains logging statements where the log object is injected using the @Logger annotation, TestNG always barfs with a null pointer exception when it encounters a logging statement in the code... Perhaps I can mock the log object. Any hints here? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4045235#4045235 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4045235 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Unit Testing EL in EJB-QL/HQL
Yeah, I mock the log object in my unit tests to get around the fact that there
is no application context active. It looks like this, and seems to work ok:
| package org.uscm.crs.misc;
|
| import org.jboss.seam.log.Log;
| import org.jboss.seam.log.Logging;
|
| public class MockSeamLogger implements Log {
|
|
| private Log log;
|
| public MockSeamLogger() {
| log = Logging.getLog(MockSeamLogger.class);
| }
|
| public MockSeamLogger(Class clazz) {
| log = Logging.getLog(clazz);
| }
|
|
| private Object clean(Object object) {
| if (object instanceof String) {
| String string = (String) object;
| return string.replace("#{", "{");
| }
| return object;
| }
|
| public void debug(Object object, Object... params) {
| log.debug(clean(object), params);
| }
|
|
| public void debug(Object object, Throwable t, Object... params) {
| log.debug(clean(object), t, params);
|
| }
|
| public void error(Object object, Object... params) {
| log.error(clean(object), params);
| }
|
| public void error(Object object, Throwable t, Object... params) {
| log.error(clean(object), t, params);
|
| }
|
| public void fatal(Object object, Object... params) {
| log.fatal(clean(object), params);
| }
|
| public void fatal(Object object, Throwable t, Object... params) {
| log.fatal(clean(object), t, params);
|
| }
|
| public void info(Object object, Object... params) {
| log.info(clean(object), params);
| }
|
| public void info(Object object, Throwable t, Object... params) {
| log.info(clean(object), t, params);
|
| }
|
| public boolean isDebugEnabled() {
| return true;
| }
|
| public boolean isErrorEnabled() {
| return true;
| }
|
| public boolean isFatalEnabled() {
| return true;
| }
|
| public boolean isInfoEnabled() {
| return true;
| }
|
| public boolean isTraceEnabled() {
| return true;
| }
|
| public boolean isWarnEnabled() {
| return true;
| }
|
| public void trace(Object object, Object... params) {
| log.trace(clean(object), params);
| }
|
| public void trace(Object object, Throwable t, Object... params) {
| log.trace(clean(object), t, params);
| }
|
| public void warn(Object object, Object... params) {
| log.warn(clean(object), params);
| }
|
| public void warn(Object object, Throwable t, Object... params) {
| log.warn(clean(object), t);
| }
|
| }
|
I'm definitely interested to hear if anyone else has found useful patterns for
unit testing. I'm wondering if it'd be worth it to simply set up the
Application context manually; it might be lightweight enough to be reasonable
in a unit test.
View the original post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4045259#4045259
Reply to the post :
http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4045259
___
jboss-user mailing list
jboss-user@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
[jboss-user] [JBoss Seam] - Re: Unit Testing EL in EJB-QL/HQL
Well injection of logs is only saving you this: public Log log = Logging.getLog(RegisterAndLoginTest.class); | I use this outside of SFSBs where unit testing is important. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4045302#4045302 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4045302 ___ jboss-user mailing list jboss-user@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
