How to use testMultiDoubleArray method of org.mockito.internal.matchers.apachecommons.EqualsBuilderTest class

You need to create a MOCK of pcUserService first, and then use that mock.

PcUserService mock = org.mockito.Mockito.mock(PcUserService.class);
when(mock.read("1")).thenReturn(pcUser);

To to this, you can use PowerMockito.spy(...) and PowerMockito.doReturn(...).

Moreover, you have to specify the PowerMock runner at your test class, and prepare the class for testing, as follows:

@PrepareForTest(Util.class)
@RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
public class UtilTest {

   @Test
   public void testMethod() throws Exception {
      PowerMockito.spy(Util.class);
      PowerMockito.doReturn("abc").when(Util.class, "anotherMethod");

      String retrieved = Util.method();

      Assert.assertNotNull(retrieved);
      Assert.assertEquals(retrieved, "abc");
   }
}

Hope it helps you.

Well mockito mocks works by extending the class and overriding the method, which in your case is not possible on A.a(String). If you want this to happen you have to remove the final modifier.

Now assuming A.a(String) is not final, what you ask is completely doable with mockito:

given(mockA.a(anyString()).willAnswer(returnOfB(bInstance));

Answer<String> returnOfB(final B bInstance) {
    return new Answer<String>() {
         public String answer(Invocation invocation) {
             String arg = (String) invocation.getActualArguments()[0];
             return bInstance.b(arg);
         }
    };
}

Please note this answer has been written on a phone and might have typo, or wrong names, though you should get the idea of what should be done to achieve what you want.

Cheers

In this sort of situation, I would use physical files for testing the component and not rely on a mocking framework. As fge mentions it may be easier plus you don't have to worry about any incorrect assumptions you may make of your mock.

For instance, if you rely upon File#listFiles() you may have your mock return a fixed list of Files, however, the order they are returned in is not guaranteed - a fact you may only discover when you run your code on a different platform.

I would consider using JUnit's TemporaryFolder rule to help you set up the file and directory structure you need for your test, e.g.:

public class DummyFileClassTest {
    @Rule
    public TemporaryFolder folder = new TemporaryFolder();

    @Test
    public void someMethod() {
        // given
        final File file1 = folder.newFile("myfile1.txt");
        final File file2 = folder.newFile("myfile2.txt");

        ... etc...
    }
}

The rule should clean up any created files and directories when the test completes.

InOrder helps you to do that.

ServiceClassA firstMock = mock(ServiceClassA.class);
ServiceClassB secondMock = mock(ServiceClassB.class);

Mockito.doNothing().when(firstMock).methodOne();   
Mockito.doNothing().when(secondMock).methodTwo();  

//create inOrder object passing any mocks that need to be verified in order
InOrder inOrder = inOrder(firstMock, secondMock);

//following will make sure that firstMock was called before secondMock
inOrder.verify(firstMock).methodOne();
inOrder.verify(secondMock).methodTwo();

Further reading has led me to try using ArgumentCaptors and the following works, although much more verbose than I would like.

ArgumentCaptor<String> argument = ArgumentCaptor.forClass(String.class);

verify(errors, atLeastOnce()).add(argument.capture(), any(ActionMessage.class));

List<String> values = argument.getAllValues();

assertTrue(values.contains("exception.message"));
assertTrue(values.contains("exception.detail"));

Not possible through mockito. From their wiki

Why Mockito doesn't mock private methods?

Firstly, we are not dogmatic about mocking private methods. We just don't care about private methods because from the standpoint of testing private methods don't exist. Here are a couple of reasons Mockito doesn't mock private methods:

It requires hacking of classloaders that is never bullet proof and it changes the api (you must use custom test runner, annotate the class, etc.).

It is very easy to work around - just change the visibility of method from private to package-protected (or protected).

It requires me to spend time implementing & maintaining it. And it does not make sense given point #2 and a fact that it is already implemented in different tool (powermock).

Finally... Mocking private methods is a hint that there is something wrong with OO understanding. In OO you want objects (or roles) to collaborate, not methods. Forget about pascal & procedural code. Think in objects.

If I was to test the code, I'd do the following.

Firstly, refactor the code so that the Socket isn't directly instantiated in the method you want to test. The example below shows the smallest change I can think of to make that happen. Future changes might factor out the Socket creation to a completely separate class, but I like small steps and I don't like making big changes on untested code.

public boolean sendTo(String hostname, int port) {
    boolean sent = false;

    try {
        Socket socket = createSocket();
        OutputStream out = socket.getOutputStream();
        out.write(payload);
        socket.close();
        sent = true;
    } catch (UnknownHostException e) {
        // TODO
    } catch (IOException e) {
        // TODO
    }

    return sent;
}

protected Socket createSocket() {
    return new Socket();
}

Now that the socket creation logic is outside of the method you are trying to test, you can start to mock things up and hook into the creation the socket.

public class MessageTest {
    @Test
    public void testSimplePayload() () {
        byte[] emptyPayload = new byte[1001];

        // Using Mockito
        final Socket socket = mock(Socket.class);
        final ByteArrayOutputStream byteArrayOutputStream = new ByteArrayOutputStream();
        when(socket.getOutputStream()).thenReturn(byteArrayOutputStream);

        Message text = new Message(emptyPayload) {
            @Override
            protected Socket createSocket() {
                return socket;
            }
        };

        Assert.assertTrue("Message sent successfully", text.sendTo("localhost", "1234"));
        Assert.assertEquals("whatever you wanted to send".getBytes(), byteArrayOutputStream.toByteArray());
    }
}

Overriding individual methods on units you want to test is really useful for testing, especially in ugly code with horrible dependencies. Obviously the best solution is sorting out dependencies (in this case I would think that a Message not depend on a Socket, maybe there is a Messager interface as glowcoder suggests), but it's nice to move towards the solution in the smallest possible steps.

I think you need to pass the Matcher to the jsonPath method. For example.

.andExpect(jsonPath("$.version", is("0.1")))

References:
http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/3.2.x/javadoc-api/org/springframework/test/web/servlet/result/MockMvcResultMatchers.html#jsonPath(java.lang.String,%20org.hamcrest.Matcher)

https://www.petrikainulainen.net/programming/spring-framework/integration-testing-of-spring-mvc-applications-write-clean-assertions-with-jsonpath/

SpringMVC/ mockMVC/ jsonpath compare list of strings