How to use should_verify_lazily method of org.mockito.junit.VerificationCollector class

Take a look at the Mockito API docs. As the linked document mentions (Point # 12) you can use any of the doThrow(),doAnswer(),doNothing(),doReturn() family of methods from Mockito framework to mock void methods.

For example,

Mockito.doThrow(new Exception()).when(instance).methodName();

or if you want to combine it with follow-up behavior,

Mockito.doThrow(new Exception()).doNothing().when(instance).methodName();

Presuming that you are looking at mocking the setter setState(String s) in the class World below is the code uses doAnswer method to mock the setState.

World mockWorld = mock(World.class); 
doAnswer(new Answer<Void>() {
    public Void answer(InvocationOnMock invocation) {
      Object[] args = invocation.getArguments();
      System.out.println("called with arguments: " + Arrays.toString(args));
      return null;
    }
}).when(mockWorld).setState(anyString());

Mockito/Hamcrest and generic classes

Yes, this is a general problem with Mockito/Hamcrest. Generally using isA() with generic classes produces a warning.

There are predifined Mockito matchers for the most common generic classes: anyList(), anyMap(), anySet() and anyCollection().

Suggestions:

anyIterable() in Mockito 2.1.0

Mockito 2.1.0 added a new anyIterable() method for matching Iterables:

when(client.runTask(anyString(), anyString(), anyIterable()).thenReturn(...)

Ignore in Eclipse

If you just want to get rid of the warning in Eclipse. Option exists since Eclipse Indigo:

Window > Preferences > Java > Compiler > Errors/Warnings > Generic types > Ignore unavoidable generic type problems

Quick Fix with @SuppressWarnings

I suggest you do this if you have the problem only once. I personally don't remember ever needing an isA(Iterable.class).

As Daniel Pryden says, you can limit the @SuppressWarnings to a local variable or a helper method.

Use a generic isA() matcher with TypeToken

This solves the problem for good. But it has two disadvantages:

• The syntax is not too pretty and might confuse some people.
• You have an additional dependency on the library providing the TypeToken class. Here I used the TypeToken class from Guava. There's also a TypeToken class in Gson and a GenericType in JAX-RS.

Using the generic matcher:

import static com.arendvr.matchers.InstanceOfGeneric.isA;
import static org.mockito.ArgumentMatchers.argThat;

// ...

when(client.runTask(anyString(), anyString(), argThat(isA(new TypeToken<Iterable<Integer>>() {}))))
            .thenReturn(...);

Generic matcher class:

package com.arendvr.matchers;

import com.google.common.reflect.TypeToken;
import org.mockito.ArgumentMatcher;

public class InstanceOfGeneric<T> implements ArgumentMatcher<T> {
    private final TypeToken<T> typeToken;

    private InstanceOfGeneric(TypeToken<T> typeToken) {
        this.typeToken = typeToken;
    }

    public static <T> InstanceOfGeneric<T> isA(TypeToken<T> typeToken) {
        return new InstanceOfGeneric<>(typeToken);
    }

    @Override
    public boolean matches(Object item) {
        return item != null && typeToken.getRawType().isAssignableFrom(item.getClass());
    }
}

Mockito.verify(foo, Mockito.times(1)).add("1");
Mockito.verify(foo, Mockito.times(1)).add(Mockito.anyString());

The first verify checks the expected parametrized call and the second verify checks that there was only one call to add at all.

Check the Java API for List.
The get(int index) method is declared to throw only the IndexOutOfBoundException which extends RuntimeException.
You are trying to tell Mockito to throw an exception SomeException() that is not valid to be thrown by that particular method call.

To clarify further.
The List interface does not provide for a checked Exception to be thrown from the get(int index) method and that is why Mockito is failing.
When you create the mocked List, Mockito will use the definition of List.class to creates its mock.

The behavior you are specifying with the when(list.get(0)).thenThrow(new SomeException()) doesn't match the method signature in List API, because get(int index) method does not throw SomeException() so Mockito fails.

If you really want to do this, then have Mockito throw a new RuntimeException() or even better throw a new ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException() since the API specifies that that is the only valid Exception to be thrown.

You simply forgot to add the dependencies to your project which are according to the pom file:

<dependency>
  <groupId>net.bytebuddy</groupId>
  <artifactId>byte-buddy</artifactId>
  <version>1.3.16</version>
  <scope>runtime</scope>
</dependency>
<dependency>
  <groupId>org.objenesis</groupId>
  <artifactId>objenesis</artifactId>
  <version>2.1</version>
  <scope>runtime</scope>
</dependency>

In other words you need to add byte-buddy 1.3.16 and objenesis 2.1 to your project too.

More details here

All warnings go away when alternative way of mock specification is used:

    ScheduledFuture<?> future = Mockito.mock(ScheduledFuture.class);
    Mockito.doReturn(future).when(executor).schedule(
        Mockito.any(Runnable.class),
        Mockito.anyLong(),
        Mockito.any(TimeUnit.class)
    );

You can do it with Mockito and PowerMockito.

Say you have ClassUnderTest with a constructor

public class ClassUnderTest {
    String name;
    boolean condition;

    public ClassUnderTest(String name, boolean condition) {
       this.name = name;
       this.condition = condition;
       init();
    }

    ...
}

And another class that calls that constructor

public class MyClass {

    public MyClass() { } 

    public void createCUTInstance() {
       // ...
       ClassUnderTest cut = new ClassUnderTest("abc", true);
       // ...
    }

    ...
}

At the Test class we could...

(1) use PowerMockRunner and cite both target classes above in the PrepareForTest annotation:

@RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
@PrepareForTest({ ClassUnderTest.class, MyClass.class })
public class TestClass {

(2) intercept the constructor to return a mock object:

@Before
public void setup() {
    ClassUnderTest cutMock = Mockito.mock(ClassUnderTest.class);
    PowerMockito.whenNew(ClassUnderTest.class)
                .withArguments(Matchers.anyString(), Matchers.anyBoolean())
                .thenReturn(cutMock);
}

(3) validate the constructor call:

@Test
public void testMethod() {
    // prepare
    MyClasss myClass = new MyClass();

    // execute
    myClass.createCUTInstance();

    // checks if the constructor has been called once and with the expected argument values:
    String name = "abc";
    String condition = true;
    PowerMockito.verifyNew(ClassUnderTest.class).withArguments(name, condition);
}

It sounds like you may want to be using the .expects(1) type methods that mock frameworks usually provide.

Using mockito, if you were testing a List and wanted to verify that clear was called 3 times and add was called at least once with these parameters you do the following:

List mock = mock(List.class);        
someCodeThatInteractsWithMock();                 

verify(mock, times(3)).clear();
verify(mock, atLeastOnce()).add(anyObject());      

Source - MockitoVsEasyMock

JUnit and TestNG are the main unit test frameworks.

Comparison can be found here - http://www.mkyong.com/unittest/junit-4-vs-testng-comparison

I've used JUnit in most places I've worked, it seems to be the standard, but there are some nice things in TestNG.

I've used the following in combination with JUnit to facilitate testing:

• Mockito for mocking objects - http://code.google.com/p/mockito/
• Hamcrest assertions for more readable assertions - http://code.google.com/p/hamcrest/
• Twip for parameterized testing, the JUnit stuff isn't the greatest, in fact TestNG does this better as well - http://twip.sourceforge.net/