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

If you are mocking the behavior (with something like doNothing()) there should really be no need to call to verify*(). That said, here's my stab at re-writing your test method:

@PrepareForTest({InternalUtils.class})
@RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
public class InternalServiceTest { //Note the renaming of the test class.
   public void testProcessOrder() {
        //Variables
        InternalService is = new InternalService();
        Order order = mock(Order.class);

        //Mock Behavior
        when(order.isSuccessful()).thenReturn(true);
        mockStatic(Internalutils.class);
        doNothing().when(InternalUtils.class); //This is the preferred way
                                               //to mock static void methods.
        InternalUtils.sendEmail(anyString(), anyString(), anyString(), anyString());

        //Execute
        is.processOrder(order);            

        //Verify
        verifyStatic(InternalUtils.class); //Similar to how you mock static methods
                                           //this is how you verify them.
        InternalUtils.sendEmail(anyString(), anyString(), anyString(), anyString());
   }
}

I grouped into four sections to better highlight what is going on:

1. Variables

I choose to declare any instance variables / method arguments / mock collaborators here. If it is something used in multiple tests, consider making it an instance variable of the test class.

2. Mock Behavior

This is where you define the behavior of all of your mocks. You're setting up return values and expectations here, prior to executing the code under test. Generally speaking, if you set the mock behavior here you wouldn't need to verify the behavior later.

3. Execute

Nothing fancy here; this just kicks off the code being tested. I like to give it its own section to call attention to it.

4. Verify

This is when you call any method starting with verify or assert. After the test is over, you check that the things you wanted to have happen actually did happen. That is the biggest mistake I see with your test method; you attempted to verify the method call before it was ever given a chance to run. Second to that is you never specified which static method you wanted to verify.

Additional Notes

This is mostly personal preference on my part. There is a certain order you need to do things in but within each grouping there is a little wiggle room. This helps me quickly separate out what is happening where.

I also highly recommend going through the examples at the following sites as they are very robust and can help with the majority of the cases you'll need:

• https://github.com/powermock/powermock/wiki/Mockito (PowerMock Overview / Examples)
• (Mockito Overview / Examples)

Here is a solution that will work for you particular case:

First of all you need to create a PersonMixin since you cannot add the required annotations to the mock.

import com.fasterxml.jackson.annotation.JsonAutoDetect;
import com.fasterxml.jackson.annotation.JsonProperty;


@JsonAutoDetect(getterVisibility = JsonAutoDetect.Visibility.NONE, isGetterVisibility = JsonAutoDetect.Visibility.NONE)
public interface PersonMixin {

    @JsonProperty
    String getName();

    @JsonProperty
    Integer getAge();
}

Now, use the object mapper like the in following code and you will get the same result as when you serialize the real object:

Person mockPerson = mock(Person.class);
when(mockPerson.getName()).thenReturn(name);
when(mockPerson.getAge()).thenReturn(age);
objectMapper.addMixInAnnotations(Person.class, PersonMixin.class);
try {
    System.out.println(objectMapper.writeValueAsString(mockPerson));
} catch (JsonProcessingException e) {
    e.printStackTrace();
    System.err.println("Failed to serialize mock object.");
}

Mockito itself doesn't seem to be able to mock native methods according to this Google Group thread. However you do have two options:

1. Wrap the TableElement class in an interface and mock that interface to properly test that your SUT calls the wrapped insertRow(...) method. The drawback is the extra interface that you need to add (when GWT project should've done this in their own API) and the overhead to use it. The code for the interface and the concrete implementation would look like this:

   // the mockable interface
   public interface ITableElementWrapper {
       public void insertRow(int index);
   }
   
   // the concrete implementation that you'll be using
   public class TableElementWrapper implements ITableElementWrapper {
       TableElement wrapped;
   
       public TableElementWrapper(TableElement te) {
           this.wrapped = te;
       }
   
       public void insertRow(int index) {
           wrapped.insertRow(index);
       }
   }
   
   // the factory that your SUT should be injected with and be 
   // using to wrap the table element with
   public interface IGwtWrapperFactory {
       public ITableElementWrapper wrap(TableElement te);
   }
   
   public class GwtWrapperFactory implements IGwtWrapperFactory {
       public ITableElementWrapper wrap(TableElement te) {
           return new TableElementWrapper(te);
       }
   }
   

2. Use Powermock and it's Mockito API extension called PowerMockito to mock the native method. The drawback is that you have another dependency to load into your test project (I'm aware this may be a problem with some organizations where a 3rd party library has to be audited first in order to be used).

Personally I'd go with option 2, as GWT project is not likely to wrap their own classes in interfaces (and it is more likely they have more native methods that needs to be mocked) and doing it for yourself to only wrap a native method call is just waste of your time.

While a partial mock isn't a bad idea, you might find your code easier to follow if you use an ArgumentCaptor instead to get the values after the fact. It's a special argument matcher that keeps track of the value it matches.

// initialized with MockitoAnnotations.initMocks();
@Captor ArgumentCaptor<Integer> offsetCaptor;
@Captor ArgumentCaptor<float[]> floatsCaptor;
@Mock Bar bar;

@Test
public void valuesShouldBeCloseEnough() {
  Sut sut = new Sut(bar);
  sut.doSomething();
  verify(bar).setFoo(offsetCaptor.capture(), floatsCaptor.capture());

  // check values with assertValuesAreCloseEnough, declared elsewhere
  assertValuesAreCloseEnough(offsetCaptor.getValue(), floatsCaptor.getValue());
}

Make sure the hamcrest jar is higher on the import order than your JUnit jar.

JUnit comes with its own org.hamcrest.Matcher class that is probably being used instead.

You can also download and use the junit-dep-4.10.jar instead which is JUnit without the hamcrest classes.

mockito also has the hamcrest classes in it as well, so you may need to move\reorder it as well

Code that instantiates objects using new directly makes testing difficult. By using the Factory pattern you move the creation of the object outside of the code to be tested. This gives you a place to inject a mock object and/or mock factory.

Note that your choice of MyTest as the class to be tested is a bit unfortunate as the name implies that it is the test itself. I'll change it to MyClass. Also, creating the object in the constructor could easily be replaced by passing in an instance of A so I'll move the creation to a method that would be called later.

public interface AFactory
{
    public A create(int x, int y);
}

public class MyClass
{
    private final AFactory aFactory;

    public MyClass(AFactory aFactory) {
        this.aFactory = aFactory;
    }

    public void doSomething() {
        A a = aFactory.create(100, 101);
        // do something with the A ...
    }
}

Now you can pass in a mock factory in the test that will create a mock A or an A of your choosing. Let's use Mockito to create the mock factory.

public class MyClassTest
{
    @Test
    public void doSomething() {
        A a = mock(A.class);
        // set expectations for A ...
        AFactory aFactory = mock(AFactory.class);
        when(aFactory.create(100, 101)).thenReturn(a);
        MyClass fixture = new MyClass(aFactory);
        fixture.doSomething();
        // make assertions ...
    }
}

Using Mockito, you can do spying on real objects like this:

import org.junit.Test;
import static org.mockito.Mockito.*;
public class MyClassTest {
    @Test
    public void otherMethodShouldBeCalled() {
        MyClass myClass = new MyClass();
        MyClass spy = spy(myClass);

        spy.myMethod(true);
        verify(spy).otherMethod();
    }
}

There are some gotchas, so take a look at the relevant documentation as well.

PowerMock implements its own MockMaker which leads to incompatibility with Mockito mock-maker-inline, even if PowerMock is just added as a dependency and not used. If two org.mockito.plugins.MockMaker exist in path then any only one can be used, which one is undetermined.

PowerMock can however delegate calls to another MockMaker, and for then tests are run without PowerMock. Since PowerMock 1.7.0 this can be configured with using the PowerMock Configuration.

The MockMaker can be configured by creating the file org/powermock/extensions/configuration.properties and setting:

mockito.mock-maker-class=mock-maker-inline

Example of using Mockito mock-maker-inline with PowerMock: https://github.com/powermock/powermock-examples-maven/tree/master/mockito2

You want to set up an Answer object that does that. Have a look at the Mockito documentation, at https://static.javadoc.io/org.mockito/mockito-core/2.8.47/org/mockito/Mockito.html#answer_stubs

You might write something like

when(mockService.doAction(any(Request.class), any(Callback.class))).thenAnswer(
    new Answer<Object>() {
        Object answer(InvocationOnMock invocation) {
            ((Callback<Response>) invocation.getArguments()[1]).reply(x);
            return null;
        }
});

(replacing x with whatever it ought to be, of course)