Test code with dispatch_async calls - objective-c

Following TDD I'm developing an iPad app that downloads some info from the internet and displays it on a list, allowing the user to filter that list using a search bar.
I want to test that, as the user types in the search bar, the internal variable with the filter text is updated, the filtered list of items is updated, and finally the table view receives a "reloadData" message.
These are my tests:
- (void)testSutChangesFilterTextWhenSearchBarTextChanges
{
// given
sut.filterText = #"previous text";
// when
[sut searchBar:nil textDidChange:#"new text"];
// then
assertThat(sut.filterText, is(equalTo(#"new text")));
}
- (void)testSutReloadsTableViewDataAfterChangeFilterTextFromSearchBar
{
// given
sut.tableView = mock([UITableView class]);
// when
[sut searchBar:nil textDidChange:#"new text"];
// then
[verify(sut.tableView) reloadData];
}
NOTE: Changing the "filterText" property triggers right now the actual filtering process, which has been tested in other tests.
This works OK as my searchBar delegate code was written as follows:
- (void)searchBar:(UISearchBar *)searchBar textDidChange:(NSString *)searchText
{
self.filterText = searchText;
[self.tableView reloadData];
}
The problem is that filtering this data is becoming a heavy process that right now is being done on the main thread, so during that time the UI is blocked.
Therefore, I thought of doing something like this:
- (void)searchBar:(UISearchBar *)searchBar textDidChange:(NSString *)searchText
{
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{
NSArray *filteredData = [self filteredDataWithText:searchText];
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
self.filteredData = filteredData;
[self.tableView reloadData];
});
});
}
So that the filtering process occurs in a different thread and when it has finished, the table is asked to reload its data.
The question is... how do I test these things inside dispatch_async calls?
Is there any elegant way of doing that other than time-based solutions? (like waiting for some time and expect that those tasks have finished, not very deterministic)
Or maybe I should put my code on a different way to make it more testable?
In case you need to know, I'm using OCMockito and OCHamcrest by Jon Reid.
Thanks in advance!!

There are two basic approaches. Either
Make things synchronous only while testing. Or,
Keep things asynchronous, but write an acceptance test that does resynchronizing.
To make things synchronous for testing only, extract the code that actually does work into their own methods. You already have -filteredDataWithText:. Here's another extraction:
- (void)updateTableWithFilteredData:(NSArray *)filteredData
{
self.filteredData = filteredData;
[self.tableView reloadData];
}
The real method that takes care of all the threading now looks like this:
- (void)searchBar:(UISearchBar *)searchBar textDidChange:(NSString *)searchText
{
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{
NSArray *filteredData = [self filteredDataWithText:searchText];
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
[self updateTableWithFilteredData:filteredData];
});
});
}
Notice that underneath all that threading fanciness, it really just calls two methods. So now to pretend that all that threading was done, have your tests just invoke those two methods in order:
NSArray *filteredData = [self filteredDataWithText:searchText];
[self updateTableWithFilteredData:filteredData];
This does mean that -searchBar:textDidChange: won't be covered by unit tests. A single manual test can confirm that it's dispatching the right things.
If you really want an automated test on the delegate method, write an acceptance test that has its own run loop. See Pattern for unit testing async queue that calls main queue on completion. (But keep acceptance tests in a separate test target. They're too slow to include with unit tests.)

Albite Jons options are very good options most of the time, sometime it creates less cluttered code when doing the following. For example if your API has a lot small methods that are synchronised using a dispatch queue.
Have a function like this (it could be a method of your class as well).
void dispatch(dispatch_queue_t queue, void (^block)())
{
if(queue)
{
dispatch_async(queue, block);
}
else
{
block();
}
}
Then use this function to call the blocks in your API methods
- (void)anAPIMethod
{
dispatch(dispQueue, ^
{
// dispatched code here
});
}
You would usually initialise the queue in your init method.
#implementation MyAPI
{
dispatch_queue_t dispQueue;
}
- (instancetype)init
{
self = [super init];
if (self)
{
dispQueue = dispatch_queue_create("myQueue", DISPATCH_QUEUE_SERIAL);
}
return self;
}
Then have a private method like this, to set this queue to nil. It is not part of your interface, the API consumer will never see this.
- (void) disableGCD
{
dispQueue = nil;
}
In your test target you create a category to expose the GCD disabling method:
#interface TTBLocationBasedTrackStore (Testing)
- (void) disableGCD;
#end
You call this in your test setup and your blocks will be called directly.
The advantage in my eyes is debugging. When a test case involves a runloop so that blocks are actually called, the problem is that there has to be a timeout involved. This timeout is usually quite short because you don't want to have tests that last long if the they run into the timeout. But having a short timeout means your test runs into the timeout when debugging.

Related

OCMock in a block context

So I am attempting to throw together a simple test to verify that I am receiving frequency values from my audioController correctly.
In my view I am making a call like this to setup up a block callback:
- (void) registerVolumeCallback {
NSNumberBlock frequencyCallback = ^(NSNumber *frequency) {
self.currentFrequency = frequency;
};
self.audioController.frequencyCallback = frequencyCallback;
}
In my audio controller the frequency callback block is called with an nsnumber containing the frequency.
In my tests file I have the following:
- (void) testFrequencyAudioServiceCallbackActive {
OCMockObject *mockEqualizer = [OCMockObject partialMockForObject:self.testEqualizer];
[[[mockEqualizer stub] andCall:#selector(mockDidUpdateFrequency:)
onObject:self] setCurrentFrequency:[OCMArg any]];
[self.testEqualizer startAnimating];
[ mockEqualizer verify];
}
And:
- (void) mockDidUpdateFrequency: (NSNumber *) frequency {
GHAssertTrue((frequency!= nil), #"Audio Service is messing up");
}
Where test equalizer is an an instance of the aforementioned view. So Im trying to do some swizzling here. Problem is, mockDidUpdateFrequency is never called. I tried putting:
self.currentFrequency = frequency;
outside of the block, and the swizzling does happen and I do get a call to mockDidUpdateFrequency. I also tried:
- (void) registerVolumeCallback {
__block UIEqualizer *blockSafeSelf = self;
NSNumberBlock frequencyCallback = ^(NSNumber *frequency) {
blockSafeSelf.currentFrequency = frequency;
};
self.audioController.frequency = frequencyCallback;
}
No luck. Some weird instance stuff is going on here in the block context that I am not aware of. Anyone know whats happening?
You'll need to provide some more details for a definitive answer. For example, how is registerVolumeCallback invoked? And is frequencyCallback your own code, or a third-party API?
With what you've provided, I suspect that frequencyCallback is an asynchronous call. So even though startAnimating might create the condition where it will eventually be invoked, you immediately verify the mock before the callback has had a chance to be invoked. To get your test to do what you want as written, you need to understand what queue that block is executed on, and you need to give it a chance to execute.
If it's invoked asynchronously on the main queue, you can let the main run loop spin before calling verify:
[self.testEqualizer startAnimating];
[[NSRunLoop currentRunLoop] runUntilDate:[NSDate dateWithTimeIntervalSinceNow:.1]];
[mockEqualizer verify];
If it's invoked on a different queue, you have some different options, but it would help to have a clearer picture how your code is structured first.

iOS threading - callback best practice

I wanted to clean up one of my projects and extracted parts of my source that I often reuse, in a single class.
This class handles some requests to a web service, everything is fine so far ;). Until I extracted the code to its own class, I handled those requests with threads and callbacks in the calling class.
Now I have a "best practice" question:
In my code I do something like(simplified):
(void)foo{
Helper *h =[[Helper alloc]init];
[h doRequest];
}
doRequest performs a network action(in its own class)and I have to wait until this is request is finished. So I need a callback or something like this.
Should I simply thread doRequest incl. waituntildone=YES?
Do I have to thread the networking in the Helper class too? Or is it enough to call the method threaded something like this:
[NSThread detachNewThreadSelector:#selector(h doRequest) toTarget:self withObject:nil];
What is the best practice to get a callback from doRequest to the caller class after it has completed it’s tasks so that I can handle the returned values from the web service?
Thanks in advance.
Johannes
Given doRequest does not return until the request is done you could do
- (void)fooCompletion:(void (^)(void))completion {
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{
Helper *h =[[Helper alloc]init];
[h doRequest];
if (completion) {
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
// doRequest is done
completion();
});
}
});
}
To call the method:
[self fooCompletion:^{
// do something after doRequest is done
}];
I personally prefer calling performSelectorOnMainThread:withObject:waitUntilDone: at the end of any helper threads that need to send information back.
[self performSelectorOnMainThread:#selector(infoFromService:) withObject:aDictionaryWithInfo waitUntilDone:NO];
- (void)infoFromService:(NSDictionary *)aDictionary {
//Process all the information and update UI
}
Be sure to always use the main thread for any UI updates even if they happen in the middle of the worker thread, for example updating a count of how much information has been downloaded. Use the same technique to call the main thread with the relevant information.

NSInvocation Leaks

I am trying to setup an NSInovcation system to launch selectors into background threads using performSelectorInBackground: - So far everything is successful when running the system on instance methods (-), but I also want to support class methods (+). I have adjusted my code to provide an invokeInBackgroundThread for both types of class and everything worked except for one problem. When the class methods are invoked I get my console flooded with "autoreleased with no pool in place" messages. No idea what is causing it. The code which is based off the DDFoundation open source project is shown below.
#implementation NSObject (DDExtensions)
...
+ (id)invokeInBackgroundThread
{
DDInvocationGrabber *grabber = [DDInvocationGrabber invocationGrabber];
[grabber setInvocationThreadType:INVOCATION_BACKGROUND_THREAD];
return [grabber prepareWithInvocationTarget:self];
}
- (id)invokeInBackgroundThread
{
DDInvocationGrabber *grabber = [DDInvocationGrabber invocationGrabber];
[grabber setInvocationThreadType:INVOCATION_BACKGROUND_THREAD];
return [grabber prepareWithInvocationTarget:self];
}
...
...
- (void)forwardInvocation:(NSInvocation *)ioInvocation
{
[ioInvocation setTarget:[self target]];
[self setInvocation:ioInvocation];
if (_waitUntilDone == NO) {
[_invocation retainArguments];
}
if (_threadType == INVOCATION_MAIN_THREAD)
{
[_invocation performSelectorOnMainThread:#selector(invoke)
withObject:nil
waitUntilDone:_waitUntilDone];
} else {
[_invocation performSelectorInBackground:#selector(invoke)
withObject:nil];
}
}
...
+(void)doSomething;
[[className invokeOnBackgroundThread] doSomething];
Main thread has autorelease pool by default, if you start extra thread - it's your job to create the pool. Actually, nothing complicated here, just
NSAutoreleasePool* pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init];
// Work...
[pool release];
Also, if you have a lot of threads, I'd suggest you to take a look at NSOperation instead of running threads with [performSelectorInBackground]. NSOperation (with wrapping queue) is more flexible solution for such tasks.

Async call in Objective-C

I'm trying to get data from a website- xml. Everything works fine.
But the UIButton remains pressed until the xml data is returned and thus if theres a problem with the internet service, it can't be corrected and the app is virtually unusable.
here are the calls:
{
AppDelegate *appDelegate = (AppDelegate *)[[UIApplication sharedApplication] delegate];
if(!appDelegate.XMLdataArray.count > 0){
[UIApplication sharedApplication].networkActivityIndicatorVisible = YES;
[appDelegate GetApps]; //function that retrieves data from Website and puts into the array - XMLdataArray.
}
XMLViewController *controller = [[XMLViewController alloc] initWithNibName:#"MedGearsApps" bundle:nil];
[self.navigationController pushViewController:controller animated:YES];
[controller release];
}
It works fine, but how can I make the view buttons functional with getting stuck. In other words, I just want the UIButton and other UIButtons to be functional whiles the thing works in the background.
I heard about performSelectorInMainThread but I can't put it to practice correctly.
You don’t understand the threading model much and you’re probably going to shoot yourself in the foot if you start adding asynchronous code without really understanding what’s going on.
The code you wrote runs in the main application thread. But when you think about it, you don’t have to write no main function — you just implement the application delegate and the event callbacks (such as touch handlers) and somehow they run automatically when the time comes. This is not a magic, this is simply a Cocoa object called a Run Loop.
Run Loop is an object that receives all events, processes timers (as in NSTimer) and runs your code. Which means that when you, for example, do something when the user taps a button, the call tree looks a bit like this:
main thread running
main run loop
// fire timers
// receive events — aha, here we have an event, let’s call the handler
view::touchesBegan…
// use tapped some button, let’s fire the callback
someButton::touchUpInside
yourCode
Now yourCode does what you want to do and the Run Loop continues running. But when your code takes too long to finish, such as in your case, the Run Loop has to wait and therefore the events will not get processed until your code finishes. This is what you see in your application.
To solve the situation you have to run the long operation in another thread. This is not very hard, but you’ll have to think of a few potential problems nevertheless. Running in another thread can be as easy as calling performSelectorInBackground:
[appDelegate performSelectorInBackground:#selector(GetApps) withObject:nil];
And now you have to think of a way to tell the application the data has been loaded, such as using a notification or calling a selector on the main thread. By the way: storing the data in the application delegate (or even using the application delegate for loading the data) is not very elegant solution, but that’s another story.
If you do choose the performSelectorInBackground solution, take a look at a related question about memory management in secondary threads. You’ll need your own autorelease pool so that you won’t leak autoreleased objects.
Updating the answer after some time – nowadays it’s usually best to run the code in background using Grand Central Dispatch:
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_global_queue(DISPATCH_QUEUE_PRIORITY_DEFAULT, 0), ^{
// No explicit autorelease pool needed here.
// The code runs in background, not strangling
// the main run loop.
[self doSomeLongOperation];
dispatch_sync(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
// This will be called on the main thread, so that
// you can update the UI, for example.
[self longOperationDone];
});
});
Use NSURLConnection's connectionWithRequest:delegate: method. This will cause the specified request to be sent asynchronously. The delegate should respond to connection:didReceiveResponse: and will be sent that message once the response is completely received.
You can make use of a background operation that gets pushed into the operation queue:
BGOperation *op = [[BGOperation alloc] init];
[[self operationQueue] addOperation:op];
[op release];
I've created specific "commands" that get executed in the background:
#implementation BGOperation
# pragma mark Memory Management
- (BGOperation *)init
{
if ((self = [super init]) != nil)
/* nothing */;
return self;
}
- (void)dealloc
{
self.jobId = nil;
[super dealloc];
}
# pragma mark -
# pragma mark Background Operation
- (void)main
{
NSAutoreleasePool *pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init];
[appDelegate GetApps];
[pool release];
return;
}
#end
After completion it might be a good idea to send a notification to the main thread because the internal database has been changed.
It looks as if you might be using NSURLConnection inside your getApps method. If so, you should convert it to an asynchronous call.

OCUnit test for protocols/callbacks/delegate in Objective-C

Using OCUnit, is there a way to test delegate protocols?
I'm trying this, which doesn't work.
-(void) testSomeObjDelegate {
SomeObj obj = [[SomeObj alloc] initWithDelegate:self];
[obj executeMethod];
}
-(void) someObjDelegateMethod {
//test something here
}
I'm going to try calling the obj method on a different thread and have the test sleep until the delegate is called. It just seems like there should be an easier way to test this.
Testing a delegate is trivial. Just set an ivar in the test in your callback method, and check it after what should be triggering the delegate callback.
For example, if I have a class Something that uses a delegate of protocol SomethingDelegate and sends that delegate -something:delegateInvoked: in response to some message, I can test it lik ethis:
#interface TestSomeBehavior : SenTestCase <SomethingDelegate>
{
Something *_object;
BOOL _callbackInvoked;
}
#end
#implementation TestSomeBehavior
- (void)setUp {
[super setUp];
_object = [[Something alloc] init];
_object.delegate = self;
}
- (void)tearDown {
_object.delegate = nil;
[_object release];
[super tearDown];
}
- (void)testSomeBehaviorCallingBack {
[_object doSomethingThatShouldCallBack];
STAssertTrue(_callbackInvoked,
#"Delegate should send -something:delegateInvoked:");
}
- (void)something:(Something *)something delegateInvoked:(BOOL)invoked {
_callbackInvoked = YES;
}
#end
I think you already understand this, however, from the way you've phrased your question. (I'm mostly posting this for other readers.) I think you're actually asking a more subtle question: How do I test something that may occur later such as something that spins the runloop. My cue is your mention of sleeping and threading.
First off, you should not just arbitrarily invoke a method on another thread. You should only do so if it's documented to be safe to use in that way. The reason is that you don't know what the internals of the class do. For example, it might schedule events on the run loop, in which case running the method on a different thread will make them happen on a different run loop. This would then screw up the class's internal state.
If you do need to test something that may take a little time to happen, you can do this just by running the current run loop. Here's how I might rewrite the individual test method above to do that:
- (void)testSomeBehaviorCallingBack {
NSDate *fiveSecondsFromNow = [NSDate dateWithTimeIntervalSinceNow:5.0];
[_object doSomethingThatShouldCallBack];
[[NSRunLoop currentRunLoop] runUntilDate:fiveSecondsFromNow];
STAssertTrue(_callbackInvoked,
#"Delegate should send -something:delegateInvoked:");
}
This will spin the current run loop in the default mode for 5 seconds, under the assumption that -doSomethingThatShouldCallBack will schedule its work on the main run loop in the default mode. This is usually OK because APIs that work this way often let you specify a run loop to use as well as a mode to run in. If you can do that, then you can use -[NSRunLoop runMode:beforeDate:] to run the run loop in just that mode instead, making it more likely that the work you're expecting to be done will be.
Please, review Unit Testing Asynchronous Network Access. I think can help you.
In short what it does is:
Add the following method which will take care of the synchronization
between the unit test code and the asynchronous code under test:
- (BOOL)waitForCompletion:(NSTimeInterval)timeoutSecs {
NSDate *timeoutDate = [NSDate dateWithTimeIntervalSinceNow:timeoutSecs];
do {
[[NSRunLoop currentRunLoop] runMode:NSDefaultRunLoopMode beforeDate:timeoutDate];
if([timeoutDate timeIntervalSinceNow] < 0.0)
break;
} while (!done);
return done;
}