How to use provides_default_instance_for_deprecated_plugin method of org.mockitousage.plugins.DeprecatedInstantiatorProviderTest class

If you are mocking the behavior (with something like doNothing()) there should really be no need to call to verify*(). That said, here's my stab at re-writing your test method:

@PrepareForTest({InternalUtils.class})
@RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
public class InternalServiceTest { //Note the renaming of the test class.
   public void testProcessOrder() {
        //Variables
        InternalService is = new InternalService();
        Order order = mock(Order.class);

        //Mock Behavior
        when(order.isSuccessful()).thenReturn(true);
        mockStatic(Internalutils.class);
        doNothing().when(InternalUtils.class); //This is the preferred way
                                               //to mock static void methods.
        InternalUtils.sendEmail(anyString(), anyString(), anyString(), anyString());

        //Execute
        is.processOrder(order);            

        //Verify
        verifyStatic(InternalUtils.class); //Similar to how you mock static methods
                                           //this is how you verify them.
        InternalUtils.sendEmail(anyString(), anyString(), anyString(), anyString());
   }
}

I grouped into four sections to better highlight what is going on:

1. Variables

I choose to declare any instance variables / method arguments / mock collaborators here. If it is something used in multiple tests, consider making it an instance variable of the test class.

2. Mock Behavior

This is where you define the behavior of all of your mocks. You're setting up return values and expectations here, prior to executing the code under test. Generally speaking, if you set the mock behavior here you wouldn't need to verify the behavior later.

3. Execute

Nothing fancy here; this just kicks off the code being tested. I like to give it its own section to call attention to it.

4. Verify

This is when you call any method starting with verify or assert. After the test is over, you check that the things you wanted to have happen actually did happen. That is the biggest mistake I see with your test method; you attempted to verify the method call before it was ever given a chance to run. Second to that is you never specified which static method you wanted to verify.

Additional Notes

This is mostly personal preference on my part. There is a certain order you need to do things in but within each grouping there is a little wiggle room. This helps me quickly separate out what is happening where.

I also highly recommend going through the examples at the following sites as they are very robust and can help with the majority of the cases you'll need:

• https://github.com/powermock/powermock/wiki/Mockito (PowerMock Overview / Examples)
• (Mockito Overview / Examples)

I think it should be

verify(mockBar, times(2)).doSomething(...)

Sample from mockito javadoc:

ArgumentCaptor<Person> peopleCaptor = ArgumentCaptor.forClass(Person.class);
verify(mock, times(2)).doSomething(peopleCaptor.capture());

List<Person> capturedPeople = peopleCaptor.getAllValues();
assertEquals("John", capturedPeople.get(0).getName());
assertEquals("Jane", capturedPeople.get(1).getName());

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.

I've just finished comparing three BDD frameworks for Java. Obviously my findings have a fairly short use-by date.

Concordion

• Very flexible
• Very pretty report output
• Nice plugin framework
• Poorly documented. I had to read the source to figure it out (luckily its extremely good quality).
• Fixtures seemed likely to end up tightly coupled to the html.

EasyB

• Very shallow learning curve (even for non-Groovy Developers)
• Extremely powerful DBUnit integration
• Apparently no support for parameters (leads to either very vague stories or duplication between text and code (edit: actually there is but the documentation for it was very well hidden.)
• Story and Code are very tightly coupled (same file)
• Very basic report output
• Couldn't get IntelliJ plugin to work
• Inactive community (Maven plugin seems to have been broken for three months - not many code examples to draw on)

JBehave

• Extremely powerful and flexible (eg reduction of boiler-plate through composition of stories as pre-requisites)
• Extensive (if fragmented) documentation and examples
• Extensive (if overwhelming) support for different frameworks and environments
• Excellent separation of story files from code
• Looks to have a pretty active community and much more examples and discussion of it on web.
• Quite a steep learning curve (took me 3-4 times longer to figure out than Concordion/EasyB)

I didn't have the chance to try out Cuke4Duke of JDave as I would have liked, but will probably push for JBehave at this time.

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.

For @Async semantics to be adhered, some active @Configuration class will have the @EnableAsync annotation, e.g.

@Configuration
@EnableAsync
@EnableScheduling
public class AsyncConfiguration implements AsyncConfigurer {

  //

}

To resolve my issue, I introduced a new Spring profile non-async.

If the non-async profile is not active, the AsyncConfiguration is used:

@Configuration
@EnableAsync
@EnableScheduling
@Profile("!non-async")
public class AsyncConfiguration implements AsyncConfigurer {

  // this configuration will be active as long as profile "non-async" is not (!) active

}

If the non-async profile is active, the NonAsyncConfiguration is used:

@Configuration
// notice the missing @EnableAsync annotation
@EnableScheduling
@Profile("non-async")
public class NonAsyncConfiguration {

  // this configuration will be active as long as profile "non-async" is active

}

Now in the problematic JUnit test class, I explicitly activate the "non-async" profile in order to mutually exclude the async behavior:

@RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class)
@SpringApplicationConfiguration(classes = Application.class)
@WebAppConfiguration
@IntegrationTest
@Transactional
@ActiveProfiles(profiles = "non-async")
public class SomeServiceIntTest {

    @Inject
    private SomeService someService;

        @Test
        public void testAsyncMethod() {

            Foo testData = prepareTestData();

            someService.asyncMethod(testData);

            verifyResults();
        }

        // verifyResult() with assertions, etc.
}

You can't do this with Mockito, but Apache Commons actually has a way to do this using one of its built in utilities. You can put this in a function in JUnit that is run after Mockito injects the rest of the mocks but before your test cases run, like this:

@InjectMocks
MyClass myClass;

@Before
public void before() throws Exception {
    FieldUtils.writeField(myClass, "fieldName", fieldValue, true);
}

According to the Mockito documentation, you can make a mock serializable:

List serializableMock = mock(List.class, withSettings().serializable());

Mockito 2 now supports final classes and methods!

But for now that's an "incubating" feature. It requires some steps to activate it which are described in What's New in Mockito 2:

Mocking of final classes and methods is an incubating, opt-in feature. It uses a combination of Java agent instrumentation and subclassing in order to enable mockability of these types. As this works differently to our current mechanism and this one has different limitations and as we want to gather experience and user feedback, this feature had to be explicitly activated to be available ; it can be done via the mockito extension mechanism by creating the file src/test/resources/mockito-extensions/org.mockito.plugins.MockMaker containing a single line:

mock-maker-inline

After you created this file, Mockito will automatically use this new engine and one can do :

 final class FinalClass {
   final String finalMethod() { return "something"; }
 }

 FinalClass concrete = new FinalClass(); 

 FinalClass mock = mock(FinalClass.class);
 given(mock.finalMethod()).willReturn("not anymore");

 assertThat(mock.finalMethod()).isNotEqualTo(concrete.finalMethod());

In subsequent milestones, the team will bring a programmatic way of using this feature. We will identify and provide support for all unmockable scenarios. Stay tuned and please let us know what you think of this feature!