Best Mockito code snippet using org.mockitousage.verification.VerificationWithAfterTest.should_verify_with_time_x
Source:VerificationWithAfterTest.java
...50 }51 }).isInstanceOf(TooManyActualInvocations.class);52 }53 @Test54 public void should_verify_with_time_x() {55 // given56 async.runAfter(10, callMock);57 async.runAfter(50, callMock);58 async.runAfter(600, callMock);59 // then60 Mockito.verify(mock, Mockito.after(300).times(2)).oneArg('1');61 }62 @Test63 public void should_verify_with_time_x_and_fail() {64 // given65 async.runAfter(10, callMock);66 async.runAfter(40, callMock);67 async.runAfter(80, callMock);68 // then69 Assertions.assertThatThrownBy(new ThrowableAssert.ThrowingCallable() {70 @Override71 public void call() {72 Mockito.verify(mock, Mockito.after(300).times(2)).oneArg('1');73 }74 }).isInstanceOf(TooManyActualInvocations.class);75 }76 @Test77 public void should_verify_with_at_least() {...
should_verify_with_time_x
Using AI Code Generation
1org.mockito.exceptions.verification.junit.ArgumentsAreDifferent: Argument(s) are different! Wanted:2listener.onEvent(3);4-> at org.mockitousage.verification.VerificationWithAfterTest.should_verify_with_time_x(VerificationWithAfterTest.java:75)5listener.onEvent(6);7-> at org.mockitousage.verification.VerificationWithAfterTest$1.onEvent(VerificationWithAfterTest.java:70)8at org.mockitousage.verification.VerificationWithAfterTest$1.onEvent(VerificationWithAfterTest.java:66)9at org.mockitousage.verification.VerificationWithAfterTest.should_verify_with_time_x(VerificationWithAfterTest.java:73)10at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)11at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39)12at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)13at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597)14at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:44)15at org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:15)16at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:41)17at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.InvokeMethod.evaluate(InvokeMethod.java:20)18at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:28)19at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunAfters.evaluate(RunAfters.java:31)20at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:76)21at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:50)22at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:193)23at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:52)24at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:191)25at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:42)26at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:184)27at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:236)
should_verify_with_time_x
Using AI Code Generation
1mock.foo();2mock.foo();3mock.foo();4mock.foo();5mock.foo();6mock.foo();7verify(mock, times(6)).foo();8verify(mock, after(100).times(6)).foo();9verify(mock, after(1000).times(6)).foo();10verify(mock, after(100).atLeast(6)).foo();11verify(mock, after(100).atMost(6)).foo();12verify(mock, after(100).never()).foo();13verify(moc
Mock same method with different parameters
mock methods in same class
Throw a RuntimeException when invoking an unstubbed method
Mockito doReturn: ambiguous reference to overloaded definition
In Java, how can I mock a service loaded using ServiceLoader?
How to use MockMvcResultMatchers.jsonPath
How to pass any UUID in a function in unit testing in mockito?
Is it possible to use Mockito in Kotlin?
Spring's @Retryable not working when running JUnit Test
How to define AnswersWithDelay for a void returning method
One way could be to avoid being too restrictive on your arguments in order to provide all the expected results with only one thenReturn
call.
For example let's say that I want to mock this method:
public String foo(String firstArgument, Object obj) {
return "Something";
}
You could then mock it by providing as many results as you want like below:
// Mock the call of foo of any String to provide 3 results
when(mock.foo(anyString(), anyObject())).thenReturn("val1", "val2", "val3");
Calls to foo
with any parameters will provide respectively "val1
", "val2
", then any subsequent calls will provide "val3
".
In case you do care about passed values but don't want to depend on call sequence you can use thenAnswer
to provide an answer that matches with the second argument like you currently do but with 3 different thenReturn
.
Assuming that you have overridden the method equals(Object o)
.
when(mock.foo(anyString(), anyObject())).thenAnswer(
invocation -> {
Object argument = invocation.getArguments()[1];
if (argument.equals(new ARequest(1, "A"))) {
return new AResponse(1, "passed");
} else if (argument.equals(new ARequest(2, "2A"))) {
return new AResponse(2, "passed");
} else if (argument.equals(new BRequest(1, "B"))) {
return new BResponse(112, "passed");
}
throw new InvalidUseOfMatchersException(
String.format("Argument %s does not match", argument)
);
}
);
Or simply, using the methods anyString
and eq
as argument marchers.
Assuming that you have overridden the method equals(Object o)
.
when(service.foo(anyString(), eq(new ARequest(1, "A"))))
.thenReturn(new AResponse(1, "passed"));
when(service.foo(anyString(), eq(new ARequest(2, "2A"))))
.thenReturn(new AResponse(2, "passed"));
when(service.foo(anyString(), eq(new BRequest(1, "B"))))
.thenReturn(new BResponse(112, "passed"));
Check out the latest blogs from LambdaTest on this topic:
Sometimes, in our test code, we need to handle actions that apparently could not be done automatically. For example, some mouse actions such as context click, double click, drag and drop, mouse movements, and some special key down and key up actions. These specific actions could be crucial depending on the project context.
Mobile apps have been an inseparable part of daily lives. Every business wants to be part of the ever-growing digital world and stay ahead of the competition by developing unique and stable applications.
In my last blog, I investigated both the stateless and the stateful class of model-based testing. Both have some advantages and disadvantages. You can use them for different types of systems, depending on whether a stateful solution is required or a stateless one is enough. However, a better solution is to use an aggregate technique that is appropriate for each system. Currently, the only aggregate solution is action-state testing, introduced in the book Paradigm Shift in Software Testing. This method is implemented in Harmony.
When working on web automation with Selenium, I encountered scenarios where I needed to refresh pages from time to time. When does this happen? One scenario is that I needed to refresh the page to check that the data I expected to see was still available even after refreshing. Another possibility is to clear form data without going through each input individually.
There is just one area where each member of the software testing community has a distinct point of view! Metrics! This contentious issue sparks intense disputes, and most conversations finish with no definitive conclusion. It covers a wide range of topics: How can testing efforts be measured? What is the most effective technique to assess effectiveness? Which of the many components should be quantified? How can we measure the quality of our testing performance, among other things?
Learn to execute automation testing from scratch with LambdaTest Learning Hub. Right from setting up the prerequisites to run your first automation test, to following best practices and diving deeper into advanced test scenarios. LambdaTest Learning Hubs compile a list of step-by-step guides to help you be proficient with different test automation frameworks i.e. Selenium, Cypress, TestNG etc.
You could also refer to video tutorials over LambdaTest YouTube channel to get step by step demonstration from industry experts.
Get 100 minutes of automation test minutes FREE!!