How to use shouldDoStuff method of org.mockitousage.annotation.AnnotationsTest class

Use @Spy annotation

@RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class)
public class DemoTest {
    @Spy
    private SomeService service = new RealServiceImpl();

    @InjectMocks
    private Demo demo;

    /* ... */
}

Mockito will consider all fields having @Mock or @Spy annotation as potential candidates to be injected into the instance annotated with @InjectMocks annotation. In the above case 'RealServiceImpl' instance will get injected into the 'demo'

For more details refer

Mockito-home

@Spy

@Mock

Caused by: org.mockito.exceptions.base.MockitoException: Checked exception is invalid for this method! Invalid: java.net.ConnectException: Test exception

As stated by the exception message (and told in comments), you have to throw a RestClientException, not a ConnectException:

Mockito.when(restOperations.exchange(
        Mockito.anyString(), Mockito.<HttpMethod>any(), Mockito.<HttpEntity<?>>any(),
        Mockito.<Class<UserByRoleHolder>>any())).thenThrow(new RestClientException("Test exception"));

You get this error message, because the method exchange declares no thrown exception and ConnectException is a checked exception (i.e. must be declared when thrown).

This isn't necessarily a smell and you can partially mock Car like so:

String carId = "...";
Car car = ...;

CarServiceImpl car = mock(CarServiceImpl.class);
when(car.findById(carId)).thenReturn(car);    
when(car.deleteById(carId)).thenCallRealMethod();

But if you can allow deleteById() to execute the 'real method' then your test must already have a repository in which case letting findById() be a 'real call' is simple and improves the quality of your test coverage at ~no additional cost. The fact that you have already tested findById() doesn't mean that you shouldn't test it again, indirectly, as part of deleteById().

I would suggest that you do either or both of the following:

• Unit test Car by giving it a mocked repository and using mocked expectations and verifications to test all of its methods
• Functional/Acceptance test Car by giving it a real repository and using real invocations on the underlying store to assert actual results for each of its methods

On a separate note, I'm guessing the idea of injecting a repository into a domain object is a deliberate use of the "active record" pattern where your entities know how to CRUD themselves. This could be considered a code smell; it breaches the SRP and could be held to be a poor separation of concerns because the domain object knows about two things: its own state and how to persist itself.

You do not need mockito to test this method, only a java.io.StringWriter.

Here is how you can write the test for a nominal use:

@Test
void status_written_in_csv_format() {
    // Setup
    WriteCsvToResponse objectUnderTest = new WriteCsvToResponse ();
    StringWriter stringWriter = new StringWriter();
    PrintWriter printWriter = new PrintWriter(stringWriter);

    // Given
    Status status = ...

    // When
    objectUnderTest.writeStatus(printWriter, status);

    // Then
    String actualCsv = stringWriter.toString();
    assertThat(actualCsv.split("\n"))
       .as("Produced CSV")
       .containsExactly(
         "id,storeId,status",
         "42,142,OK");
}

This example assume some things about your Status object, but you have the general idea. For assertions, I use AssertJ, but you can do the same with JUnit5 built-in assertions.

Hope this helps !

Technically speaking both "mocks" and "spies" are a special kind of "test doubles".

Mockito is unfortunately making the distinction weird.

A mock in mockito is a normal mock in other mocking frameworks (allows you to stub invocations; that is, return specific values out of method calls).

A spy in mockito is a partial mock in other mocking frameworks (part of the object will be mocked and part will use real method invocations).

I had a test dependency on a third-party jar which used powermock. In order to resolve this error, I had to add:

@PowerMockIgnore("jdk.internal.reflect.*")

To the class that is tested with powermock

An alternative to ArgumentMatcher is ArgumentCaptor.

Official example:

ArgumentCaptor<Person> argument = ArgumentCaptor.forClass(Person.class);
verify(mock).doSomething(argument.capture());
assertEquals("John", argument.getValue().getName());

A captor can also be defined using the @Captor annotation:

@Captor ArgumentCaptor<Person> captor;
//... MockitoAnnotations.initMocks(this);
@Test public void test() {
    //...
    verify(mock).doSomething(captor.capture());
    assertEquals("John", captor.getValue().getName());
}

From what I read on "Issue 53" of mockito (https://code.google.com/p/mockito/issues/detail?id=53) , my code was experiencing a problem due to the validation framework involved in Mockito. Precisely the following code was causing the exception per se.

private ConstantNode getConstantNode(NumericalValue value){
    ConstantNode node = Mockito.mock(ConstantNode.class);
    Mockito.when(node.evaluate()).thenReturn(value);
    Mockito.when(node.toString()).thenReturn(value.toString());
    return node;
}

If you remember from my code, the parameter value is ALSO A MOCK, so that when value.toString() is called on the thenReturn(), I believe (and someone please correct me if I am wrong) that the validation framework is triggered and makes sure that every "when" has had its thenReturn() called/validated/etc. So that if this happenes, the Mockito.when(node.toString()).thenReturn(value.toString() will not be validated because it hasn´t returned from the valute.toString(), which started the whole "validate everything" chain.

How I fixed it:

private ConstantNode getConstantNode(NumericalValue value){
    ConstantNode node = Mockito.mock(ConstantNode.class);
    Mockito.when(node.evaluate()).thenReturn(value);

    String numberToString = value.toString();

    Mockito.when(node.toString()).thenReturn(numberToString);
    return node;
}

This way, it can be validated. I find this a complete code smell because I will literally have to leave a comment that explains why I am using a seemingly useless intermediate variable in the code.

Thanks for the help.

What is wrong?

Well, the problem here is quite subtle, when you call Mockito.spy(p), mockito creates behind the scene some kind of decorator over your instance of ClassWithInnerObject allowing to monitor all methods calls on your instance. Thanks to that, you can check how many times a given method has been called but on the decorator only not on your instance. And here, when you use an inner class, it calls innerFunc() on your instance of ClassWithInnerObject not on the decorator so for Mockito innerFunc() has not been called.