How to use shouldFailZeroInteractionsVerification method of org.mockitousage.verification.BasicVerificationInOrderTest class

In Mockito 2.1.0 and up with Java 8 you can pass the lambda to argThat out of the box so that one does not need a custom argument matchers. For the example in the OP would be:

verify(mockedFoo).doThing(argThat((Bar aBar) -> aBar.getI() == 5));

This is because as of Mockito 2.1.0, ArgumentMatcher is a functional interface.

This is a bug that occurs when you use JUnit 4.12 and PowerMock < 1.6.1. The problem is solved in PowerMock 1.6.1. Please update your dependencies accordingly

testCompile 'junit:junit:4.12',
            'org.powermock:powermock-core:1.6.1',
            'org.powermock:powermock-module-junit4:1.6.1',
            'org.powermock:powermock-api-mockito:1.6.1'

If you cannot upgrade PowerMock then you can use JUnit 4.11.

testCompile 'junit:junit:4.11',
            'org.powermock:powermock-core:1.5.6',
            'org.powermock:powermock-module-junit4:1.5.6',
            'org.powermock:powermock-api-mockito:1.5.6'

Could you please add further lines of the stacktrace, which uncover more details about the problem.

Plain Mockito library

import org.mockito.Mock;
...
@Mock
MyService myservice;

and

import org.mockito.Mockito;
...
MyService myservice = Mockito.mock(MyService.class);

come from the Mockito library and are functionally equivalent.
They allow to mock a class or an interface and to record and verify behaviors on it.

The way using annotation is shorter, so preferable and often preferred.

---

Note that to enable Mockito annotations during test executions, the MockitoAnnotations.initMocks(this) static method has to be called.
To avoid side effect between tests, it is advised to do it before each test execution :

@Before 
public void initMocks() {
    MockitoAnnotations.initMocks(this);
}

Another way to enable Mockito annotations is annotating the test class with @RunWith by specifying the MockitoJUnitRunner that does this task and also other useful things :

@RunWith(org.mockito.runners.MockitoJUnitRunner.class)
public MyClassTest{...}

---

Spring Boot library wrapping Mockito library

This is indeed a Spring Boot class:

import org.springframework.boot.test.mock.mockito.MockBean;
...
@MockBean
MyService myservice;

The class is included in the spring-boot-test library.

It allows to add Mockito mocks in a Spring ApplicationContext.
If a bean, compatible with the declared class exists in the context, it replaces it by the mock.
If it is not the case, it adds the mock in the context as a bean.

Javadoc reference :

Annotation that can be used to add mocks to a Spring ApplicationContext.

...

If any existing single bean of the same type defined in the context will be replaced by the mock, if no existing bean is defined a new one will be added.

---

When use classic/plain Mockito and when use @MockBean from Spring Boot ?

Unit tests are designed to test a component in isolation from other components and unit tests have also a requirement : being as fast as possible in terms of execution time as these tests may be executed each day dozen times on the developer machines.

Consequently, here is a simple guideline :

As you write a test that doesn't need any dependencies from the Spring Boot container, the classic/plain Mockito is the way to follow : it is fast and favors the isolation of the tested component.
If your test needs to rely on the Spring Boot container and you want also to add or mock one of the container beans : @MockBean from Spring Boot is the way.

---

Typical usage of Spring Boot @MockBean

As we write a test class annotated with @WebMvcTest (web test slice).

The Spring Boot documentation summarizes that very well :

Often @WebMvcTest will be limited to a single controller and used in combination with @MockBean to provide mock implementations for required collaborators.

Here is an example :

import org.junit.Test;
import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
import org.mockito.Mockito;
import org.springframework.beans.factory.annotation.Autowired;
import org.springframework.boot.test.autoconfigure.web.servlet.WebMvcTest;
import org.springframework.boot.test.mock.mockito.MockBean;
import org.springframework.http.MediaType;
import org.springframework.test.context.junit4.SpringRunner;
import org.springframework.test.web.servlet.MockMvc;

import static org.springframework.test.web.servlet.request.MockMvcRequestBuilders.*;
import static org.springframework.test.web.servlet.result.MockMvcResultMatchers.*;

@RunWith(SpringRunner.class)
@WebMvcTest(FooController.class)
public class FooControllerTest {

    @Autowired
    private MockMvc mvc;

    @MockBean
    private FooService fooServiceMock;

    @Test
    public void testExample() throws Exception {
         Foo mockedFoo = new Foo("one", "two");

         Mockito.when(fooServiceMock.get(1))
                .thenReturn(mockedFoo);

         mvc.perform(get("foos/1")
            .accept(MediaType.TEXT_PLAIN))
            .andExpect(status().isOk())
            .andExpect(content().string("one two"));
    }

}

I can only assume that you are looking for thenAnswer & Answer. With thenAnswer you can modify the arguments of the mocked method and also return a result from that method.

E.g:

Set<String> result = new HashSet<>();
result.add("123");

Mockito.when(mockedMtnService.getModelSearchStrings(Mockito.anyMap(), Mockito.anyObject())).thenAnswer(new Answer<Set>() {
    @Override
    public String answer(InvocationOnMock invocation) throws Throwable {
        Map<String,List<Object>> mapArg = (Map<String,List<Object>>)invocation.getArguments()[0];
        // do something with mapArg....
        return result;
    }
});

Or with Java 8 lambda:

Mockito.when(mockedMtnService.getModelSearchStrings(Mockito.anyMap(), Mockito.anyObject())).thenAnswer(invocation -> {
    Map<String,List<Object>> mapArg = (Map<String,List<Object>>)invocation.getArguments()[0];
    // do something with mapArg....
    return result;
});

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());
    }
}

The nested generics-problem can be avoided with the @Captor annotation:

public class Test{

    @Mock
    private Service service;

    @Captor
    private ArgumentCaptor<ArrayList<SomeType>> captor;

    @Before
    public void init(){
        MockitoAnnotations.initMocks(this);
    }

    @Test 
    public void shouldDoStuffWithListValues() {
        //...
        verify(service).doStuff(captor.capture()));
    }
}

I used a spy for the self same exercise:

#13

I changed my SniperListener mock into a spy thus:

private final SniperListener sniperListenerSpy = spy(new SniperListenerStub());
private final AuctionSniper sniper = new AuctionSniper(auction, sniperListenerSpy);

And also created a stubbed implementation of SniperListener:

private class SniperListenerStub implements SniperListener {
    @Override
    public void sniperLost() {
    }

    @Override
    public void sniperBidding() {
        sniperState = SniperState.bidding;
    }

    @Override
    public void sniperWinning() {
    }
}

The book uses JMock's "States", but I used a nested enum instead:

private SniperState sniperState = SniperState.idle;

private enum SniperState {
    idle, winning, bidding
}

You then have to use regular JUnit asserts to test for the state:

@Test
public void reportsLostIfAuctionClosesWhenBidding() {
    sniper.currentPrice(123, 45, PriceSource.FromOtherBidder);
    sniper.auctionClosed();
    verify(sniperListenerSpy, atLeastOnce()).sniperLost();
    assertEquals(SniperState.bidding, sniperState);
}

This post does not directly answer your question but provides a different point of view.

One approach to make your clients consistently call close is to free them from this responsibility.

How can you do it?

Use template pattern.

Sketch implementation

You mentioned that you're working with TCP, so let's assume that you have a TcpConnection class that has a close() method.

Let's define TcpConnectionOperations interface:

public interface TcpConnectionOperations {
  <T> T doWithConnection(TcpConnectionAction<T> action);
}

and implement it:

public class TcpConnectionTemplate implements TcpConnectionOperations {
  @Override
  public <T> T doWithConnection(TcpConnectionAction<T> action) {
    try (TcpConnection tcpConnection = getConnection()) {
      return action.doWithConnection(tcpConnection);
    }
  }
}

TcpConnectionAction is just a callback, nothing fancy.

public interface TcpConnectionAction<T> {
  T doWithConnection(TcpConnection tcpConnection);
}

How the library should be consumed now?

• It must be consumed only through TcpConnectionOperations interface.
• Consumers supply actions

For example:

String s = tcpConnectionOperations.doWithConnection(connection -> {
  // do what we with with the connection
  // returning to string for example
  return connection.toString();
});

Pros

• Clients don't have to worry about:
• • getting a TcpConnection
• • closing the connection
• You are in control of creating connections:
• • you can cache them
• • log them
• • collect statistics
• • many other use cases...
• In tests you can provide mock TcpConnectionOperations and mock TcpConnections and make assertions against them

Cons

This approach may not work if the lifecycle of a resource is longer than action. E.g. it is necessary for the client to keep the resource for a longer time.

Then you might want to dive deep in ReferenceQueue/Cleaner (since Java 9) and related API.

Inspired by Spring framework

This pattern is widely used in Spring framework.

See for example:

• JdbcTemplate
• TransactionTemplate
• JmsTemplate.
• (there are many others)

Update 2/7/19

How can I cache/reuse the resource?

This is some kind of pooling:

a pool is a collection of resources that are kept ready to use, rather than acquired on use and released

Some pools in Java:

• HikariCP is a JDBC connection pool library
• OkHttps ConnectionPool
• Tomcat JDBC Connection pool
• ThreadPoolExecutor

When implementing a pool several questions are raised:

• When the resource actually should be closed?
• How the resource should be shared between multiple threads?

When the resource should be closed?

Usually pools provide an explicit close method (it may have a different name but the purpose is the same) which closes all the resources held.

• HikariDataSource#close
• ConnectionPool#evictAll "Close and remove all idle connections in the pool."
• ConnectionPool#close
• ThreadPoolExecutor#shutdown

How it can be shared across multiple threads?

It depends on a kind of the resource itself.

Usually you want to ensure that only one thread accesses one resource.

This can be done using some kind of locking

Demo

Note that code provided here is only for demonstration purposes It has awful performance and violates some OOP principles.

IpAndPort.java

@Value
public class IpAndPort {
  InetAddress address;
  int port;
}

TcpConnection.java

@Data
public class TcpConnection {
  private static final AtomicLong counter = new AtomicLong();

  private final IpAndPort ipAndPort;
  private final long instance = counter.incrementAndGet();

  public void close() {
    System.out.println("Closed " + this);
  }
}

CachingTcpConnectionTemplate.java

public class CachingTcpConnectionTemplate implements TcpConnectionOperations {
  private final Map<IpAndPort, TcpConnection> cache
      = new HashMap<>();
  private boolean closed; 
  public CachingTcpConnectionTemplate() {
    System.out.println("Created new template");
  }

  @Override
  public synchronized <T> T doWithConnectionTo(IpAndPort ipAndPort, TcpConnectionAction<T> action) {
    if (closed) {
      throw new IllegalStateException("Closed");
    }
    TcpConnection tcpConnection = cache.computeIfAbsent(ipAndPort, this::getConnection);
    try {
      System.out.println("Executing action with connection " + tcpConnection);
      return action.doWithConnection(tcpConnection);
    } finally {
      System.out.println("Returned connection " + tcpConnection);
    }
  }

  private TcpConnection getConnection(IpAndPort ipAndPort) {
    return new TcpConnection(ipAndPort);
  }


  @Override
  public synchronized void close() {
    if (closed) {
      throw new IllegalStateException("closed");
    }
    closed = true;
    for (Map.Entry<IpAndPort, TcpConnection> entry : cache.entrySet()) {
      entry.getValue().close();
    }
    System.out.println("Template closed");
  }
}

Tests infrastructure

TcpConnectionOperationsParameterResolver.java

public class TcpConnectionOperationsParameterResolver implements ParameterResolver, AfterAllCallback {
  private final CachingTcpConnectionTemplate tcpConnectionTemplate = new CachingTcpConnectionTemplate();

  @Override
  public boolean supportsParameter(ParameterContext parameterContext, ExtensionContext extensionContext) throws ParameterResolutionException {
    return parameterContext.getParameter().getType().isAssignableFrom(CachingTcpConnectionTemplate.class)
        && parameterContext.isAnnotated(ReuseTemplate.class);
  }

  @Override
  public Object resolveParameter(ParameterContext parameterContext, ExtensionContext extensionContext) throws ParameterResolutionException {
    return tcpConnectionTemplate;
  }

  @Override
  public void afterAll(ExtensionContext context) throws Exception {
    tcpConnectionTemplate.close();
  }
}

The ParameterResolver and AfterAllCallback are from JUnit.

@ReuseTemplate is a custom annotation

ReuseTemplate.java:

@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
public @interface ReuseTemplate {
}

Finally test:

@ExtendWith(TcpConnectionOperationsParameterResolver.class)
public class Tests2 {
  private final TcpConnectionOperations tcpConnectionOperations;

  public Tests2(@ReuseTemplate TcpConnectionOperations tcpConnectionOperations) {
    this.tcpConnectionOperations = tcpConnectionOperations;
  }

  @Test
  void google80() throws UnknownHostException {
    tcpConnectionOperations.doWithConnectionTo(new IpAndPort(InetAddress.getByName("google.com"), 80), tcpConnection -> {
      System.out.println("Using " + tcpConnection);
      return tcpConnection.toString();
    });
  }

  @Test
  void google80_2() throws Exception {
    tcpConnectionOperations.doWithConnectionTo(new IpAndPort(InetAddress.getByName("google.com"), 80), tcpConnection -> {
      System.out.println("Using " + tcpConnection);
      return tcpConnection.toString();
    });
  }

  @Test
  void google443() throws Exception {
    tcpConnectionOperations.doWithConnectionTo(new IpAndPort(InetAddress.getByName("google.com"), 443), tcpConnection -> {
      System.out.println("Using " + tcpConnection);
      return tcpConnection.toString();
    });
  }
}

Running:

$ mvn test

Output:

Created new template
[INFO] Running Tests2
Executing action with connection TcpConnection(ipAndPort=IpAndPort(address=google.com/74.125.131.102, port=80), instance=1)
Using TcpConnection(ipAndPort=IpAndPort(address=google.com/74.125.131.102, port=80), instance=1)
Returned connection TcpConnection(ipAndPort=IpAndPort(address=google.com/74.125.131.102, port=80), instance=1)
Executing action with connection TcpConnection(ipAndPort=IpAndPort(address=google.com/74.125.131.102, port=443), instance=2)
Using TcpConnection(ipAndPort=IpAndPort(address=google.com/74.125.131.102, port=443), instance=2)
Returned connection TcpConnection(ipAndPort=IpAndPort(address=google.com/74.125.131.102, port=443), instance=2)
Executing action with connection TcpConnection(ipAndPort=IpAndPort(address=google.com/74.125.131.102, port=80), instance=1)
Using TcpConnection(ipAndPort=IpAndPort(address=google.com/74.125.131.102, port=80), instance=1)
Returned connection TcpConnection(ipAndPort=IpAndPort(address=google.com/74.125.131.102, port=80), instance=1)
Closed TcpConnection(ipAndPort=IpAndPort(address=google.com/74.125.131.102, port=80), instance=1)
Closed TcpConnection(ipAndPort=IpAndPort(address=google.com/74.125.131.102, port=443), instance=2)
Template closed

The key observation here is that connections are reused (see "instance=")

This is oversimplified example of what can be done. Sure, in the real world pooling connections is not so simple. The pool should not grow indefinitely, connections can be kept only for specific period of time and so on. Usually some problems are solved by having something in the background.

Returning to the question

I don't see how to use try-with-resources statement in the context of tests (I'm using JUnit5 with Mockito), in that the "resource" is not short-lived - it is part of the test fixture.

See Junit 5 User Guide. Extension model

Being diligent as always, I tried implementing finalize() and testing for closure there, but it turns out finalize() is not even called (Java10). This is also marked as deprecated and I'm sure this idea will be frowned upon.

You overrode finalize so that it throws an exception but they are ignored.

See Object#finalize

If an uncaught exception is thrown by the finalize method, the exception is ignored and finalization of that object terminates.

The best you can do here is to log the resource leakage and close the resource

To be clear, I want the application's tests (that use my library) to fail if they don't call close() on my objects.

How do application tests use your resource? Do they instantiate it using new operator? If yes then I think PowerMock can help you (but I'm not sure)

If you have hidden instantiation of the resource behind some kind of a factory then you can give the application tests some mock factory

---

If you're interested you can watch this talk. It's in Russian, but still may be helpful (part of my answer is based on this talk).

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 :-)