How to use mockName method of org.mockitousage.debugging.VerboseLoggingOfInvocationsOnMockTest class

You're misunderstanding what a mock is. When you're doing

MyClass myClass = Mockito.mock(MyClass.class);
// ...
assertNull(myClass.methodToTest(myObject));

You're not actually invoking methodToTest on your real object. You're invoking methodToTest on the mock, which by default, does nothing and return null, unless it was stubbed. Quoting from Mockito docs:

By default, for all methods that return value, mock returns null, an empty collection or appropriate primitive/primitive wrapper value (e.g: 0, false, ... for int/Integer, boolean/Boolean, ...).

This explains your subsequent error: the method was really not invoked on the mock.

It seems what you want here is a spy instead:

You can create spies of real objects. When you use the spy then the real methods are called (unless a method was stubbed).

A note of warning though: since it is the real methods that are getting called, you should not use Mockito.when but prefer Mockito.doReturn(...).when, otherwise the method will be called once for real. If you consider the expression:

Mockito.when(myClass.methodUsedInMethodBeingTested(Matchers.any(MyTypeParam.class))).thenReturn(Collections.<X, Y> emptyMap());
             ^-----------------------------------^
                 this will be invoked by Java

the argument of the method when must be evaluated, but this means the method methodUsedInMethodBeingTested will be invoked. And since we have a spy, it is the real method that will be invoked. So, instead, use:

MyClass spy = Mockito.spy(new MyClass());
Mockito.doReturn(Collections.<X, Y> emptyMap()).when(spy).methodUsedInMethodBeingTested(Matchers.any(MyTypeParam.class));
assertNull(spy.methodToTest(myObject));
Mockito.verify(spy).methodUsedInMethodBeingTested(Matchers.any(MyTypeParam.class));

You can use a Mockito Spy for this. If you setup anotherObj as a spy you can verify method calls on that object. In your example you need to make sure that the call to foo uses the spy instead of an ordinary implementation of anotherObj. The spy is setup something like this:

AnotherClass anotherObjSpy = Mockito.spy(new AnotherClass());
// do stuff -- e.g. anotherObjSpy.foo(...);
verify(anotherObjSpy).codePath1(...);

For the future I would recommend Eran Harel's answer (refactoring moving new to factory that can be mocked). But if you don't want to change the original source code, use very handy and unique feature: spies. From the documentation:

You can create spies of real objects. When you use the spy then the real methods are called (unless a method was stubbed).

Real spies should be used carefully and occasionally, for example when dealing with legacy code.

In your case you should write:

TestedClass tc = spy(new TestedClass());
LoginContext lcMock = mock(LoginContext.class);
when(tc.login(anyString(), anyString())).thenReturn(lcMock);

How about

when( method-call ).thenReturn( value1, value2, value3 );

You can put as many arguments as you like in the brackets of thenReturn, provided they're all the correct type. The first value will be returned the first time the method is called, then the second answer, and so on. The last value will be returned repeatedly once all the other values are used up.

The problem with using RETURN_DEEP_STUBS is that you'll get a different mock each time you call a method. I think from your question that you want to use a default Answer that actually returns the mock on which it was called, for each method that has the right return type. This could look something like the following. Note that I haven't tested this, so it may contain typos, but I hope that the intention is clear in any case.

import static org.mockito.Mockito.RETURNS_DEFAULTS;
import org.mockito.invocation.InvocationOnMock;
import org.mockito.stubbing.Answer;

public class SelfReturningAnswer implements Answer<Object> {

    public Object answer(InvocationOnMock invocation) throws Throwable {
        Object mock = invocation.getMock();
        if(invocation.getMethod().getReturnType().isInstance(mock)){
            return mock;
        }
        return RETURNS_DEFAULTS.answer(invocation);
    }
}

Then, when you create your mock, specify this as your default answer. This will make your mock return itself from each method that it can; but it will behave like an ordinary mock when you call a method whose return type is wrong for the mock.

Create your mock like this

Builder mockBuilder = mock( Builder.class, new SelfReturningAnswer());

or create a constant for this class and write something like

@Mock(answer = SELF_RETURNING) private Builder mockBuilder;

Hope that helps.

The Mock is used to each class or service you are using. The class under test should not be Mocked. Lets assume you are connecting to a remote service which is being built by one of your engineering team, and you are not familiar with its internal functionality but you know what requests and response it returns. In that case, you can create a Mock of that Object, and defines it with set of responses returns in different situations. Each situation should get its own different test and for each response you should check separately the reaction of the code (you are working on).

Another great example is creating a limitation checks. Lets think of exception that might be thrown in some situations. You can Mock the object that will throw the Exception which is simple(~2-3 line of test code if you are using Mock) and you can check how the code you have written reacts to that Exception. Without the Mock the throwing of an exception might be really complicated thing and not so easy to use if you are not familiar with the small details. And of course the Mock enables you to be on focus of the main functionality you are checking cause it make the checking time very very small. And that is a bless when time to market is a critical thing.

Instead of writing

when(mock.method(Matchers.argThat(new MyMatcher1() {
    @Override
    public boolean matches(Object arg0) {
           // comparison logic
    }
}))).thenReturn(result1);

Try this.

doReturn(result1).when(mock).method(Matchers.argThat(new MyMatcher1() {

    @Override
    public boolean matches(Object arg0) {
               // comparison logic
    }
}));

and similarly for result2 and result3.

This is described at #12, but in my opinion, the documentation is unclear about the fact that this construction is actually needed in this case. I will talk to the rest of the Mockito team about improving the documentation here.

Good luck.

EDIT 2020-09-21: Since 3.4.0, Mockito supports mocking static methods, API is still incubating and is likely to change, in particular around stubbing and verification. It requires the mockito-inline artifact. And you don't need to prepare the test or use any specific runner. All you need to do is :

@Test
public void name() {
    try (MockedStatic<LoggerFactory> integerMock = mockStatic(LoggerFactory.class)) {
        final Logger logger = mock(Logger.class);
        integerMock.when(() -> LoggerFactory.getLogger(any(Class.class))).thenReturn(logger);
        new Controller().log();
        verify(logger).warn(any());
    }
}

The two inportant aspect in this code, is that you need to scope when the static mock applies, i.e. within this try block. And you need to call the stubbing and verification api from the MockedStatic object.

@Mick, try to prepare the owner of the static field too, eg :

@PrepareForTest({GoodbyeController.class, LoggerFactory.class})

EDIT1 : I just crafted a small example. First the controller :

import org.slf4j.Logger;
import org.slf4j.LoggerFactory;

public class Controller {
    Logger logger = LoggerFactory.getLogger(Controller.class);

    public void log() { logger.warn("yup"); }
}

Then the test :

import org.junit.Test;
import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
import org.powermock.core.classloader.annotations.PrepareForTest;
import org.powermock.modules.junit4.PowerMockRunner;
import org.slf4j.Logger;
import org.slf4j.LoggerFactory;

import static org.mockito.Matchers.any;
import static org.mockito.Matchers.anyString;
import static org.mockito.Mockito.verify;
import static org.powermock.api.mockito.PowerMockito.mock;
import static org.powermock.api.mockito.PowerMockito.mockStatic;
import static org.powermock.api.mockito.PowerMockito.when;

@RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
@PrepareForTest({Controller.class, LoggerFactory.class})
public class ControllerTest {

    @Test
    public void name() throws Exception {
        mockStatic(LoggerFactory.class);
        Logger logger = mock(Logger.class);
        when(LoggerFactory.getLogger(any(Class.class))).thenReturn(logger);
        
        new Controller().log();
        
        verify(logger).warn(anyString());
    }
}

Note the imports ! Noteworthy libs in the classpath : Mockito, PowerMock, JUnit, logback-core, logback-clasic, slf4j

EDIT2 : As it seems to be a popular question, I'd like to point out that if these log messages are that important and require to be tested, i.e. they are feature / business part of the system then introducing a real dependency that make clear theses logs are features would be a so much better in the whole system design, instead of relying on static code of a standard and technical classes of a logger.

For this matter I would recommend to craft something like= a Reporter class with methods such as reportIncorrectUseOfYAndZForActionX or reportProgressStartedForActionX. This would have the benefit of making the feature visible for anyone reading the code. But it will also help to achieve tests, change the implementations details of this particular feature.

Hence you wouldn't need static mocking tools like PowerMock. In my opinion static code can be fine, but as soon as the test demands to verify or to mock static behavior it is necessary to refactor and introduce clear dependencies.

You would need a spy, not a mock A:

    A a = Mockito.spy(new A(1,1));
    a.getPrice(2);
    verify(a, times(1)).getPriceForOne();