How to use createMethodToTestWith method of org.mockito.internal.invocation.InvocationsFinderTest class

Assuming the following method to test:

public boolean doSomething(SomeClass arg);

Mockito documentation says that you should not use captor in this way:

when(someObject.doSomething(argumentCaptor.capture())).thenReturn(true);
assertThat(argumentCaptor.getValue(), equalTo(expected));

Because you can just use matcher during stubbing:

when(someObject.doSomething(eq(expected))).thenReturn(true);

But verification is a different story. If your test needs to ensure that this method was called with a specific argument, use ArgumentCaptor and this is the case for which it is designed:

ArgumentCaptor<SomeClass> argumentCaptor = ArgumentCaptor.forClass(SomeClass.class);
verify(someObject).doSomething(argumentCaptor.capture());
assertThat(argumentCaptor.getValue(), equalTo(expected));

To answer your question directly, you cannot use Mockito to stub a method called from the constructor. Mockito needs an instance of the class before you can begin mocking, and you haven't given yourself a way to create an instance for testing.

More generally, as mentioned in Effective Java item 17, you should not call overridable methods from constructors. If you do so, for instance, you could provide an override in a subclass that refers to a final field but that runs before the final field is set. It probably won't get you in trouble here, but it's a bad habit in Java.

Luckily, you can restructure your code to do this very easily:

public class MyClass {
  public MyClass() {
    this(true);
  }

  /** For testing. */
  MyClass(boolean runSetup) {
    if (runSetup) {
      setup();
    }
  }

  /* ... */
}

To make it even more obvious, you can make the one-parameter MyClass constructor private, and provide a public static factory method:

/* ... */
  public static MyClass createForTesting() {
    return new MyClass(false);
  }

  private MyClass(boolean runSetup) {
/* ... */

Though some developers think it is a bad practice to write any code in methods that is used mostly for tests, remember that you are in charge of the design of your code, and tests are one of few consumers you absolutely know you will need to accommodate. Though it's still a good idea to avoid explicit test setup in "production" code, creating extra methods or overloads for the sake of testing will usually make your code cleaner overall and can drastically improve your test coverage and readability.

how about you create an anonymous exception of type JsonProcessingException

when(mapper.writeValueAsString(any(Object.class))).thenThrow(new JsonProcessingException("Error"){});

The {} braces does the trick. This is much better since it is not confusing to the reader of the test code.

Akka has a class AutoPilot that is basically a general mock for actors, with the ability to respond to messages and assert that messages were sent. http://doc.akka.io/docs/akka/snapshot/java/testing.html

Here's the java example for that page. You create a probe, set an auto-pilot that can respond to messages, and get an ActorRef from it that you can substitute in for your real actor.

new JavaTestKit(system) {{
  final JavaTestKit probe = new JavaTestKit(system);
  // install auto-pilot
  probe.setAutoPilot(new TestActor.AutoPilot() {
    public AutoPilot run(ActorRef sender, Object msg) {
      sender.tell(msg, ActorRef.noSender());
      return noAutoPilot();
    }
  });
  // first one is replied to directly ...
  probe.getRef().tell("hello", getRef());
  expectMsgEquals("hello");
  // ... but then the auto-pilot switched itself off
  probe.getRef().tell("world", getRef());
  expectNoMsg();
}};

You could simply mock your ResultSet to provide a value for each field and check that the result contains what you expect.

For example with Mockito, your test would be something like this:

@RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class)
public class SomeClassTest {

    @Mock
    private ResultSet resultSet;

    @Test
    public void testConvert() throws SQLException {
        // Define the behavior of the mock for each getString method's call
        Mockito.when(resultSet.getString("id")).thenReturn("myId");
        Mockito.when(resultSet.getString("sysname")).thenReturn("myHost");
        Mockito.when(resultSet.getString("zos")).thenReturn("myOS");
        Mockito.when(resultSet.getString("customer_name")).thenReturn("myCustomerName");

        // Launch the method against your mock
        SomeClass someClass = new SomeClass();
        CItem item = someClass.convert(resultSet);

        // Check the result
        Assert.assertNotNull(item);
        Assert.assertEquals("myId", item.getHinumber());
        Assert.assertEquals("myHost", item.getHostname());
        Assert.assertEquals("myOS", item.getOs());
        Assert.assertEquals("myCustomerName", item.getTenant());
    }
}

You don't normally set properties on your mocked objects; instead, you do some specific thing when it's invoked.

when(slingHttpRequest.getAttribute("search")).thenReturn(someObject);

I suppose that "any" is actually a Mockito.any() method? In that case you can rather use Mockito.matches("regex"). See docs: https://static.javadoc.io/org.mockito/mockito-core/1.9.5/org/mockito/Matchers.html#matches(java.lang.String)

EDIT: It turns out that MockRestServiceServer uses Hamcrest matchers to verify the expectations (methods like requestTo, withSuccess etc.).

There is also a method matchesPattern(java.util.regex.Pattern pattern) in org/hamcrest/Matchers class which is available since Hamcrest 2, and it can be used to solve your problem.

But in your project you probably have the dependency on the older version of Hamcrest (1.3) which is used by, for example, junit 4.12, the latest spring-boot-starter-test-2.13, or, finally, org.mock-server.mockserver-netty.3.10.8 (transitively).

So, you need to:

1. Check the actual version of Hamcrest in your project and (if it's not 2+) update this dependency manually: https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.hamcrest/hamcrest/2.1

<dependency>
    <groupId>org.hamcrest</groupId>
    <artifactId>hamcrest</artifactId>
    <version>2.1</version>
    <scope>test</scope>
</dependency>

2. Update your test:

mockServer.expect(requestTo(matchesPattern(".*exact-example-url.com.*")))
    .andExpect(method(HttpMethod.GET))
    .andRespond(withSuccess("response", MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON));

Make sure powermockito and mockito versions are aligned as in this versions chart - MockitoUsage#supported-versions,

Mockito                     | PowerMock
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.0.0-beta - 2.0.42-beta    |   1.6.5+
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.10.19                     |   1.6.4
1.10.8 - 1.10.x             |   1.6.2+
1.9.5-rc1 - 1.9.5           |   1.5.0 - 1.5.6
1.9.0-rc1 & 1.9.0           |   1.4.10 - 1.4.12
1.8.5                       |   1.3.9 - 1.4.9
1.8.4                       |   1.3.7 & 1.3.8
1.8.3                       |   1.3.6
1.8.1 & 1.8.2               |   1.3.5
1.8                         |   1.3
1.7                         |   1.2.5

Easy way to find mockito and powermock-mockito version using maven is,

mvn dependency:tree | grep mockito
[INFO] |  \- org.mockito:mockito-core:jar:1.8.5:compile
[INFO] +- org.mockito:mockito-all:jar:1.8.5:compile
[INFO] +- org.powermock:powermock-api-mockito:jar:1.4.9:compile

Problem could be the conflicting versions of mockito in the application and the one that powermockito uses, conflicting as below in my case where I'm using powermock 1.6.5 which does not support mockito 1.8.5

mvn clean dependency:tree | grep mockito
[INFO] +- org.mockito:mockito-all:jar:1.8.5:compile

[INFO] \- org.powermock:powermock-api-mockito:jar:1.6.5:compile
[INFO]    +- org.mockito:mockito-core:jar:1.10.19:compile
[INFO]    \- org.powermock:powermock-api-mockito-common:jar:1.6.5:compile

For some reason, your test suite, tries to load the MockitoJunitRunner from the org.mockito.junit contained in the Mockito versions >= 2. O. In that version, the line:

at org.mockito.junit.MockitoJUnitRunner.<init>(MockitoJUnitRunner.java:152)

is doing this:

public MockitoJUnitRunner(Class<?> klass) throws InvocationTargetException {
        //by default, StrictRunner is used. We can change that potentially based on feedback from users
        this(new StrictRunner(new RunnerFactory().createStrict(klass), klass));
    }

and the RunnerFactory that is loaded here is from version 1.x as createStrict has been introduced in Mockito 2.x.

So go through the pom dependency tree and to find what artifact implicitly add the Mockito 2.x dependency to your project and exclude it.

Alternatively.. as a workaround, instead of the @RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class) you can use:

@Before
public void init() {
    MockitoAnnotations.initMocks(this);
}

You can also check out this Mockito cheat sheet to keep all the standards at hand.