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

Only mock the things which you cannot create or pass through yourself. Do not mock any passed-in entities; providing a fake version is often far superior.

In this scenario, we can get away with a couple of things since we know a few things about our test:

• We are getting back a Customer instance from the customerService, but we don't need to do any sort of validation on that instance.
• We have to mock the customerService out since it is an injected dependency.

In light of these two things, we should mock out CustomerService, which you do kind of successfully - since the field is named the same you don't need the extra metadata in the annotation.

@Mock
private CustomerService customerService;

You should also look to use the test runner provided with Mockito so you don't have to explicitly initialize the mocks.

@RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class)
public class RestaurantTest {
    // tests
}

Now, on to the actual unit test. The only thing that really sucks is that you have to provide an instance of a Customer to use, but outside of that, it's not too bad. Our givens are the instance of CustomerData we want to mutate, and the Customer we're providing for test. We then have to simply assert the values that we care about are coming back for our test CustomerData instance.

@Test
public void updateCustomer_WithValidInput_ShouldReturnUpdatedInput(){
    //given
    final Customer customer = new Customer();
    customer.setId("123");
    customer.setAddress("Addr1");
    customer.setName("Bob");
    customer.setCity("St8")
    customer.setLanguage("Java");

    final CustomerInputData inputData = new CustomerInputData();
    inputData.setId(customer.getId());

    //when
    when(customerService.getCustomerById(customer.getId())).thenReturn(customer);
    classUnderTest.updateCustomer(customerData);

    //then
    verify(customerService.getCustomerById("123"));
    assertThat(customerData.getCustomerName(), equalTo(customer.getName()))
    // and so forth
}

You want eq, as in:

PowerMockito.when(ResourceFactory.create(Matchers.eq(FirstResourceClass.class)))
    .thenReturn(mockFirstResource);

any() ignores the argument, and isA will check that your argument is of a certain class—but not that it equals a class, just that it is an instanceof a certain class. (any(Class) has any() semantics in Mockito 1.x and isA semantics in 2.x.)

isA(Class.class) is less specific than you need to differentiate your calls, so eq it is. Class objects have well-defined equality, anyway, so this is easy and natural for your use-case.

Because eq is the default if you don't use matchers, this also works:

PowerMockito.when(ResourceFactory.create(FirstResourceClass.class))
    .thenReturn(mockFirstResource);

Note that newer versions of Mockito have deprecated the Matchers name in favor of ArgumentMatchers, and Mockito.eq also works (albeit clumsily, because they're "inherited" static methods).

Well, the right way to do this would be:

import org.mockito.AdditionalAnswers;

String[] logEntry = // Some initialization code
List<String> logEntryList = Arrays.asList(logEntry);
when(tuple.getString(1)).thenAnswer(AdditionalAnswers.returnsElementsOf(logEntryList));

On each invocation, successive elements of logEntry array are returned. Thus, ith invocation of tuple.getString(1) returns ith element of logEntry array.

P.S: The example in documentation of returnsElementsOf (as of this writing) is not updated (it still uses ReturnsElementsOf example): #returnsElementsOf(java.util.Collection)it

This took me a while to figure out, so I am answering my own question.

import org.junit.Before;
import org.junit.Test;
import org.junit.runner.RunWith;
import org.mockito.Mockito;
import org.powermock.api.mockito.PowerMockito;
import org.powermock.core.classloader.annotations.PrepareForTest;
import org.powermock.modules.junit4.PowerMockRunner;

@RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)  // important
@PrepareForTest(MachineImpl.class)  // important: do not use Thread.class here
public class MachineImplTest {

    private MachineImpl classUnderTest;

    @Before
    public void beforeEachTest() {
        classUnderTest = new MachineImpl();
    }

    @Test
    public void sleep_Pass() {
        classUnderTest.sleep(0);
        classUnderTest.sleep(-100);
        classUnderTest.sleep(+100);
    }

    @Test
    public void sleep_Pass2() {
        // We do not want to mock all methods, only specific methods, such as Thread.sleep().
        // Use spy() instead of mockStatic().
        PowerMockito.spy(Thread.class);

        // These two lines are tightly bound.
        PowerMockito.doThrow(new InterruptedException()).when(Thread.class);
        Thread.sleep(Mockito.anyLong());

        classUnderTest.sleep(0);
        classUnderTest.sleep(-100);
        classUnderTest.sleep(+100);
    }
}

If you are using TestNG, try this:

import org.mockito.Mockito;
import org.powermock.api.mockito.PowerMockito;
import org.powermock.core.classloader.annotations.PrepareForTest;
import org.powermock.modules.testng.PowerMockTestCase;

@PrepareForTest(MachineImpl.class)  // important: do not use Thread.class here
public class MachineImplTest
extends PowerMockTestCase {
    ...
}

Read more about TestNG + Mockito + PowerMock here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/35815153/257299

In JUnit, Parameterized tests use a special runner that ensure that the test is instantiated multiple times, so each test method is called multiple times. Mockito is a tool for writing specific unit tests, so there is no built-in ability to run the same test multiple times with different Mockito expectations.

If you want your test conditions to change, your best bet is to do one of the following:

• Parameterize your test using JUnit, with a parameter for the mock inputs you want;
• Run a loop of different parameters in your test, which unfortunately avoids the "test one thing per method" philosophy
• Extract a method that actually performs the test, and create a new @Test method for each mock you want.

Note that there's no prohibition on using mock objects as @Parameterized test parameters. If you're looking to parameterize based on mocks, you can do that, possibly creating the mock and setting the expectations in a static method on the test.

Note about runners: This Parameterized test runner conflicts with Mockito's MockitoJUnitRunner: Each test class can only have one runner. You'll want to switch to @Before and @After methods or a Mockito JUnit4 rule for your setup, if you use them both.

As an example, compressed from a different answer that explains more about Parameterized runners versus JUnit rules and lifting from the JUnit4 Parameterized Test doc page and MockitoRule doc page:

@RunWith(Parameterized.class)
public class YourComponentTest {
    @Rule public MockitoRule rule = MockitoJUnit.rule();
    @Mock YourDep mockYourDep;

    @Parameters public static Collection<Object[]> data() { /* Return the values */ }

    public YourComponentTest(Parameter parameter) { /* Save the parameter to a field */ }

    @Test public void test() { /* Use the field value in assertions */ }
}

Even more meaningful :

import static org.mockito.Mockito.never;
import static org.mockito.Mockito.verify;

// ...

verify(dependency, never()).someMethod();

The documentation of this feature is there §4 "Verifying exact number of invocations / at least x / never", and the never javadoc is here.

You can accomplish what you want with Mockito's argument matchers:

myObject.doSomeStuff();

verify(myMockedOtherObject, never()).someMethodOrOther(
    Mockito.anyString(),
    Mockito.anyString()
);

You can make that a little less verbose with a static import like you have for verify and never.

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));

According to the Mockito_Maven page on the PowerMock wiki, use this:

<properties>
    <powermock.version>1.6.6</powermock.version>
</properties>
<dependencies>
   <dependency>
      <groupId>org.powermock</groupId>
      <artifactId>powermock-module-junit4</artifactId>
      <version>${powermock.version}</version>
      <scope>test</scope>
   </dependency>
   <dependency>
      <groupId>org.powermock</groupId>
      <artifactId>powermock-api-mockito</artifactId>
      <version>${powermock.version}</version>
      <scope>test</scope>
   </dependency>
</dependencies>

powermock-api-support seems to be "utility classes only", where you still need the core libraries provided in powermock-module-junit4.