How to use unused_stub_with_strictness method of org.mockitousage.junitrule.MutableStrictJUnitTestRuleTest class

Alright, I figured it out thanks to Stefan Birkner's reference

Here is the correction to my sample code:

import org.mockito.Mockito;
import org.powermock.api.mockito.PowerMockito;
import org.powermock.core.classloader.annotations.PrepareForTest;
import org.powermock.modules.junit4.PowerMockRunner;

import org.junit.Test;
import org.junit.runner.RunWith;

@RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
@PrepareForTest(Test1.class)
public class PowerMockTest {
    @Test
    public void staticVerifyTest() {
        PowerMockito.mockStatic(Test1.class);
        // Test
        Test1.staticMethod();
        PowerMockito.verifyStatic();
        Test1.staticMethod();
    }
}

After the static method is invoked, you need to verify that it was called by calling it again after your verifyStatic() call.

i.e.

        Test1.staticMethod();
        PowerMockito.verifyStatic();
        Test1.staticMethod();

You can also check if it was called multiple times like this...

Test1.staticMethod();
Test1.staticMethod();
Test1.staticMethod();
PowerMockito.verifyStatic(Mockito.times(3));
Test1.staticMethod();

An alternative approach would be to use the 'method to class' pattern.

1. Move the methods out of the customer class into another class/classes, say CustomerSomething eg/CustomerFinances (or whatever it's responsibility is).
2. Add a constructor to Customer.
3. Now you don't need to mock Customer, just the CustomerSomething class! You may not need to mock that either if it has no external dependencies.

Here's a good blog on the topic: https://simpleprogrammer.com/back-to-basics-mock-eliminating-patterns/

I looked up the source code of LogManager.class and found the reason was there's no LoggerContextFactory found in log4j-provider.properties which should be found in log4j-core.jar/META-INF.
So check your log4j-core.jar/META-INF/log4j-provider.properties file , or you can delete your log4j-core.jar in your local repository.

It appears Mockito uses an algorithm described in their JavaDoc

If I understand correctly, it will first sort on type (in this case only 1 B) and then sort on name (no changes here). It will finally inject using the OngoingInjector interface implementation, which appears to search for the first field and inject it.

Since you only have 1 B defined and there are 2 fields of B in the Mock, it will see the match of the first instance to the field and stop. This is because mocks.size() == 1 in NameBasedCandidateFilter . Therefore it will stop filtering and inject it directly. If you create multiple mocks of the same type, they will get sorted on Name and injected accordingly.

I was able to get it work when I created multiple mocks (but less than the number of fields) of a specific type.

@RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class)
public class MockitoTest {

    @Mock(name = "b2")
    private B b2;

    @Mock(name = "b3")
    private B b3;

    @InjectMocks
    private A a;

    @Test
    public void testInjection() {
        System.out.println(this.a);
    }

    static class A {

        private B b1;

        private B b2;

        private B b3;
    }

    interface B {
    }
}

This will correctly inject b2 into a.b2 and b3 into a.b3 instead of a.b1 and a.b2 (the first 2 fields that are defined in A).

You can always leave a GitHub issue on their repository with an enhancement or change on the injection filtering algorithm in order to be looked at.

If you use Mockito you can use verify() to check the number of times a method was called. Use it like this:

verify(mockedObject, times(1)).methodToValidate();

You can check if methodToValidate() was called with a specific string, e.i verify(mockedObject, times(1)).methodToValidate("a specific value"); or you can use it with anyString() like this: verify(mockedObject, times(1)).methodToValidate(anyString());.

Unless this method is called with your specified paramterer, the test will fail

Read more about verify here.

UPDATE

Since your edited post states that you are using jMock, a quick googeling showed me that it is possible to achieve a similar behaviour with jMock and it's expect method. It's used as below:

mockedObject.expects(once()).method("nameOfMethod").with( eq("An optional paramter") );

More detailed explanation can be found by reading jMocks getting started page.

Override the toString() method in your pojo class like below

@Override
public String toString() {
    return "brand: " + this.brand + ",color: " + this.color;
}


car1.toString().equals(car2.toString()); //It will return true if both objects has same values

In case you have large nos of parameter i will suggest you to go with bellow code

public static boolean comparePOJO(Object obj1, Object obj2) {
    return new Gson().toJson(obj1).equals(new Gson().toJson(obj2));
}
comparePOJO(car1,car2); //It will return true

Two more ways to do it (see my comment on the previous answer by @Tomasz Nurkiewicz):

The first relies on the fact that the compiler simply won't let you pass in something of the wrong type:

when(a.method(any(Class.class))).thenReturn(b);

You lose the exact typing (the Class<? extends A>) but it probably works as you need it to.

The second is a lot more involved but is arguably a better solution if you really want to be sure that the argument to method() is an A or a subclass of A:

when(a.method(Matchers.argThat(new ClassOrSubclassMatcher<A>(A.class)))).thenReturn(b);

Where ClassOrSubclassMatcher is an org.hamcrest.BaseMatcher defined as:

public class ClassOrSubclassMatcher<T> extends BaseMatcher<Class<T>> {

    private final Class<T> targetClass;

    public ClassOrSubclassMatcher(Class<T> targetClass) {
        this.targetClass = targetClass;
    }

    @SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
    public boolean matches(Object obj) {
        if (obj != null) {
            if (obj instanceof Class) {
                return targetClass.isAssignableFrom((Class<T>) obj);
            }
        }
        return false;
    }

    public void describeTo(Description desc) {
        desc.appendText("Matches a class or subclass");
    }       
}

Phew! I'd go with the first option until you really need to get finer control over what method() actually returns :-)

The solution here is to use a customized answer. Two code samples: the first is the test classes used, the second is the test.

First, the test classes:

private interface Foo
{
    void bar(final List<String> list);
}

private static final class X
{
    private final Foo foo;

    X(final Foo foo)
    {
        this.foo = foo;
    }

    void invokeBar()
    {
        // Note: using Guava's Lists here
        final List<String> list = Lists.newArrayList("a", "b", "c");
        foo.bar(list);
        list.clear();
    }
}

On to the test:

@Test
@SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
public void fooBarIsInvoked()
{
    final Foo foo = mock(Foo.class);
    final X x = new X(foo);

    // This is to capture the arguments with which foo is invoked
    // FINAL IS NECESSARY: non final method variables cannot serve
    // in inner anonymous classes
    final List<String> captured = new ArrayList<String>();

    // Tell that when foo.bar() is invoked with any list, we want to swallow its
    // list elements into the "captured" list
    doAnswer(new Answer()
    {
        @Override
        public Object answer(final InvocationOnMock invocation)
            throws Throwable
        {
            final List<String> list
                = (List<String>) invocation.getArguments()[0];
            captured.addAll(list);
            return null;
        }
    }).when(foo).bar(anyList());

    // Invoke...
    x.invokeBar();

    // Test invocation...
    verify(foo).bar(anyList());

    // Test arguments: works!
    assertEquals(captured, Arrays.asList("a", "b", "c"));
}

Of course, being able to write such a test requires that you are able to inject into your "outer object" sufficient state so that the test is meaningful... Here it is relatively easy.

By default, Maven assumes you wrote your code using JDK 1.5 and that you want to compile to that same target. You will need to add the maven-compiler-plugin to your build plugins, in order to tell it to use 1.8.

<build>
    <plugins>
        <plugin>
            <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
            <artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
            <version>3.3</version>
            <configuration>
                <source>1.8</source>
                <target>1.8</target>
            </configuration>
        </plugin>
    </plugins>
</build>

Check out the plugin's docs for more info: http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-compiler-plugin/compile-mojo.html