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

TL;DR; Unfortunately, there is no built-in solution yet (at time of writting, 2022), hence you are free to use and/or implement whatever fits your situation.

Example

An alternative is to use the CountDownLatch class.

public class DatabaseTest {

    /**
     * Data limit
     */
    private static final int DATA_LIMIT = 5;

    /**
     * Countdown latch
     */
    private CountDownLatch lock = new CountDownLatch(1);

    /**
     * Received data
     */
    private List<Data> receiveddata;

    @Test
    public void testDataRetrieval() throws Exception {
        Database db = new MockDatabaseImpl();
        db.getData(DATA_LIMIT, new DataCallback() {
            @Override
            public void onSuccess(List<Data> data) {
                receiveddata = data;
                lock.countDown();
            }
        });

        lock.await(2000, TimeUnit.MILLISECONDS);

        assertNotNull(receiveddata);
        assertEquals(DATA_LIMIT, receiveddata.size());
    }
}

NOTE you can't just used syncronized with a regular object as a lock, as fast callbacks can release the lock before the lock's wait method is called. See this blog post by Joe Walnes.

EDIT Removed syncronized blocks around CountDownLatch thanks to comments from @jtahlborn and @Ring

You can use PowerMockito

See the example:

Second second = Mockito.mock(Second.class);
whenNew(Second.class).withNoArguments().thenReturn(second);

But re-factoring is better decision.

According tho the Mockito documentation for Spy,

Spying on real objects is often associated with "partial mocking" concept. However, Mockito spies are not partial mocks. Mockito spy is meant to help testing other classes - not the spy itself. Therefore spy will not help if you intend to verify if method calls other method on the same object. In this case I suggest being OO/SRPy (for example you might extract new class/interface...)

The OO refers to object-oriented, and SRP refers to Single responsibility principle. It is a design pattern that states the class should have one and only one responsibility, and in this case it you would tend to write code that doesn't need to test if internal methods are called.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_responsibility_principle

PowerMockRunner is part of powermock-module-junit4.jar. You need to explicity import this jar

You could specify the dependency for this jar as per your requirement. Refer to this link.

With mockito 2.x, JDK 8 default methods are supported.

With mockito 1.x it's not possible,

Old answer

Unfortunately it's not yet possible (mockito 1.10.19), from the README.md on the github'page

JDK8 status

Mockito should work fine with JDK8 if you stay away from default methods (aka defender methods). Lambda usage may work just as good for Answers. We're unsure about every JDK8 features at the moment, like serializing a mock that uses a lambda. Error report and pull request are welcome though (contributing guide).

EDIT 1: defender methods and default methods are different names for the same thing.

I hope for a mockmaker replacement that will handle java 8 opcodes properly for such cases as some opcodes have a different semantic in Java 8.

EDIT 2: Updated the mockito readme, and this quote accordingly

A unit test shouldn't use any Spring configuration. You should simply instantiate your component, and inject dependencies (usually fake ones) manually.

You used field injection, which makes it a bit harder. With constructor injection, all you would need to do is

Logger logger = LoggerFactory.getLogger(MyController.class);
MyController controller = new MyController(logger);

Mockito can help injecting fake dependencies for you, though, even when using field injection, thanks to the @Mock, @Spy and @InjectMocks annotations:

@Spy
private Logger logger = LoggerFactory.getLogger(MyController.class);

@InjectMocks
private MyController controller;

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

That said, if I'm not mistaken, you're not using @RunWith(SpringJUnit4ClassRunner.class), so your test runner doesn't know anything about Spring, and thus doesn't create or use any Spring configuration.

The MockitoExtension class implements the BeforeEachCallback but not the BeforeAllCallback from JUnit-Jupiter-API. It does therefore not provide any additional behaviour for @BeforeAll annotated methods.

Source extract of MockitoExtension

public class MockitoExtension implements BeforeEachCallback, AfterEachCallback, ParameterResolver {

I got this when combining PowerMock with Mockito. Fixed by using compatible version as shown here: https://github.com/powermock/powermock/wiki/Mockito#supported-versions

when(
  fooDao.getBar(
    any(Bazoo.class)
  )
).thenReturn(myFoo);

or (to avoid nulls):

when(
  fooDao.getBar(
    (Bazoo)notNull()
  )
).thenReturn(myFoo);

Don't forget to import matchers (many others are available):

For Mockito 2.1.0 and newer:

import static org.mockito.ArgumentMatchers.*;

For older versions:

import static org.mockito.Matchers.*;