I have the following class definition whereby the attribute field is hydrated via reflection by NHibernate. The field is not exposed as an object but instead I want to hide it's implementation and just provide properties that reference the properties of the attribute field.
public class CustomerAttribute : ICustomerAttribute
{
private IAttribute attribute;
public string DisplayName
{
get { return attribute.DisplayName;}
}
}
I'm trying to mock this object with RhinoMocks but I'm not sure how to hydrate the attribute field for testing. I've tried setting the attribute field manually via reflection but I get a proxy error from RhinoMocks (which makes sense).
So how do I hydrate the attribute field to I can test the properties of the CustomerAttribute object?
Here is my test right now...
[Test]
public void PropertiesTest()
{
MockRepository mock = new MockRepository();
ICustomerAttribute attribute = mock.StrictMock<ICustomerAttribute>();
//Set the attribute field
FieldInfo fieldInfo = typeof(CustomerAttribute).GetField("attribute",
BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.SetField |
BindingFlags.NonPublic);
fieldInfo.SetValue(attribute, new Domain.Attribute()); //This does not work
Expect.Call(attribute.DisplayName).Return("Postal Code");
mock.ReplayAll();
Assert.AreEqual(true, attribute.DisplayName);
mock.VerifyAll();
}
If CustomerAttribute is your subject under test (SUT) and IAttribute is a dependency that needs to be mocked for testing, IAttribute more than likely needs to be injectable into CustomerAttribute. This should be done either via constructor (usually preferred) or property injection. Look into "Inversion of Control" if you're not familiar with it already.
Also, ICustomerAttribute should NOT be created as a mock--the concrete type should be created explicitly (i.e. "new CustomerAttribute"). After all, CustomerAttribute (the implentation!) is the what you are trying to test.
I am not sure what you are trying to test here. If you want to test your CustomerAttribute class than you need to create an instance of it (instead of mocking ICustomerAttribute).
In order to set the attribute on your CustomerAttribute you could either
Use dependency injection to inject the correct attribute and use it during testing
Use reflection of the real CustomerAttribute instance you created for testing
Related
I am using the Ninject Factory Extensions so that I can create objects that have services injected plus custom values
so:
public interface IGameOperationsFactory
{
ISpinEvaluator Create(GameArtifact game);
IReelSpinner CreateSpinner(GameArtifact game);
}
Then in module:
Bind<IGameOperationsFactory>().ToFactory().InSingletonScope();
Bind<ISpinEvaluator>().To<DefaultSpinEvaluatorImpl>();
Bind<IReelSpinner>().To<DefaultReelSpinnerImpl>();
The actual factory gets injected in a classes' constructor and is then used like:
_spinner = _factory.CreateSpinner(_artifact);
_spinEval = _factory.Create(_artifact);
Where _artifact is of type GameArtifact
Then in each of the implementation's constructors services plus the passed in objects are injected. The GameArtifact is successfully passed in the first constructor, and in the second one a "new" GameArtifact is passed in, i.e. not a null one but one with just default values as if the framework just called
new GameArtifact()
instead of passing in the already existing one!
The Constructor for the two objects is very similar, but the one that doesn't work looks like:
[Inject]
public DefaultReelSpinnerImpl(GameArtifact ga, IGameOperationsFactory factory, IRandomService serv)
{
_rand = serv;
_ra = ga.Reels;
_mainReels = factory.Create(_ra);
_winLine = ga.Config.WinLine;
}
Where the factory and serv are injected by Ninject and ga is SUPPOSED to be passed in via the factory.
Anyone have a clue why a new "fresh" object is passed in rather than the one I passed in??
I have rewritten you sample a little bit, and it seems to work fine. Could you provide more detailed code sample?
My implementation
I have changed verb Create to Get to match Ninject conventions
public interface IGameOperationsFactory
{
ISpinEvaluator GetSpinEvaluator(GameArtifact gameArtifact);
IReelSpinner GetReelSpinner(GameArtifact gameArtifact);
}
Ninject configuration
I have added named bindings to configure factory
Bind<ISpinEvaluator>()
.To<DefaultSpinEvaluatorImpl>()
.Named("SpinEvaluator");
Bind<IReelSpinner>()
.To<DefaultReelSpinnerImpl>()
.Named("ReelSpinner");
Bind<IGameOperationsFactory>()
.ToFactory();
ps: full sample with tests
(or "Using LocationInterceptionAspect and IInstanceScopedAspect together")
Using Postsharp I'm trying to inject a property into a target class using 'IntroduceMember' and then using the 'OnGetValue' functionality of LocationInterceptionAspect dynamically give it a value on inspection.
Originally I thought that I'd need two separate aspects, one for the field injection and one for the location interception but managed to combine the two by implementing the IInstanceScopedAspect interface and inheriting from LocationInterceptionAspect.
The problem is that if I set a breakpoint I will see the property that's been injected, but if I set another breakpoint in the OnGetValue method (that gets fired for each property on the class) I can't see it...
Here's some sample code:
[Serializable]
class DALDecoratorWrapper : LocationInterceptionAspect, IInstanceScopedAspect
{
public override void OnGetValue(LocationInterceptionArgs args)
{
if (args.LocationName == "Type")
{
args.Value = "computed value here";
}
args.ProceedGetValue();
}
[IntroduceMember(OverrideAction = MemberOverrideAction.OverrideOrFail)]
public String Type { get; set; }
I was also hoping there was a better way of doing this than overriding OnGetValue as that's called for each getter where really I want to only target the getter of the property that's been injected
Cheers
To best describe what I want to happen, i'll show what i'm doing, as to me it makes sense that this would work ...
public class foo()
{
public foo()
{
MyContext db = new MyContext();
foobar = db.foobar.first();
this = Mapper.Map<bar, foo>(foobar);
}
}
Basically, I want to use automapper within the destination class to map from the source class within the destination classes constructor.
Is there a way to do this?
You cannot do this because this is read only in C#. You cannot assign this a value in the constructor. Not cool to try to change the reference of an object in its constructor. You will have to do the mapping manually and assign each individual property. I would also question if it as a good practice to assign an object values from a database or service in a default constructor. It is not very transparent to the user of the object what is going on and you can get an exception in your constructor.
Say I am calling a third-party API which returns a Post, and I want to take that and transfer properties from it into my own Post class. I have in the past had a method like public static my.Post build(their.Post post) which maps the properties how I want.
However, is it better/valid to have a constructor that accepts their.Post and does the property mapping in there? Or should there always be a separate class that does the converting, and leaves my.Post in a more POJO state?
Thanks for your thoughts!
These answers always starts with "it depends."
People generally argue against using public static methods, based on the fact that it is hard to mock them (I don't buy into that bandwagon).
This comes down to design, do you want their post to be part of your class? If you add it as a "copy" constructor then it will now be part of your class and you are dependent on changes to post. If they change their post, your code has to adapt.
The better solution is to decouple it. You would need to find some extenal method to map the two. One way is to use a static builder method (like you mentioned) or if you want to take it a step further, a more complicated solution would be to extract the information you want from their post into some type of generic collection class. Then create a constructor that will accept that constructor class. This way if they change their design your class stays in tact and all you have to do is update the mappings from their post to your generic representation of it.
public class MyPost{
public MyPost(ICollectionOfProperties props){
//copy all properties.
}
}
public static class TheirPostExtensions{
public static ICollectionOfProperties ExtractProperties(this TheirPost thePost){
return new CollectionOfProperties(){
A = thePost.PropA,
B = thePost.PropB
};
}
}
public class Example{
public Example(){
TheirPost tp = new TheirPost();
ICollectionOfProperties props = tp.ExtractProperties();
MyPost mp = new MyPost(props);
}
}
I have a class TxRx with a property called Common. Common then has a property called LastMod. I want to write a RhinoMock expectation to show that LastMod has been set with something. So I tried:
var txRx = MockRepository.GenerateMock<TxRx>();
var common = MockRepository.GenerateMock<Common>();
txRx.Expect(t => t.Common).Return(common);
txRx.Expect(t => t.Common.LastMod).SetPropertyAndIgnoreArgument();
But I get the following exception:
System.InvalidOperationException: Invalid call, the last call has been used or no call has been made (make sure that you are calling a virtual (C#) / Overridable (VB) method).
at Rhino.Mocks.LastCall.GetOptions[T]()
at Rhino.Mocks.RhinoMocksExtensions.Expect[T,R](T mock, Function`2 action)
at ...
I presume this means Common needs to be virtual, but as it is a property on a LinqToSql generated class I can't make it virtual (other than hacking the autogen code which is not really an option).
Is there any way around this?
One possibility is to wrap TxRx in a mockable class (i.e. one that has overridable methods and properties which you wish to mock out or implements an interface which defines the properties or methods that you're interested in) and then pass around the wrapper rather than the LinqToSQL class itself.
Perhaps something like the following:
public class TxRxWrapper : ITxRxWrapper
{
private TxRx m_txrx;
public object LastMod
{
get { return m_txrx.Common.LastMod; }
}
...
}
public interface ITxRxWrapper
{
public object LastMod { get; }
...
}
Not ideal (i.e. it can get somewhat cumbersome to pass wrappers around just for mockability!) but that's the only way you can get RhinoMocks to mock properties/methods for you.
The other option is to use TypeMock instead which I believe uses a different mechanism to mock stuff out. I don't think it's free, though.
You would need to replace your second expectation with
txRx.Expect(() => common.LastMod).SetPropertyAndIgnoreArgument();
But the Common property itself needs to be virtual for this to work.