having a problem
I have a class with method called execute(). In some spock unit test i dummy out the execute method and give it a mock closure like this
def setup () {
rule = new DynamicRule ()
}
def "test default execution " (){
given : "basic AORule "
def mockres
rule.metaClass.execute = {-> mockres = "did nothing"} //mock the action
def res = rule.execute()
expect : "execute should do nothing "
mockres == "did nothing"
}
if i run this test it fails. in the idea editor it shows the mock closure as underlined. but the rule.execute() on the next line isnt - so it can see the method
if i change this test for this
rule.metaClass.execute2 = {-> mockres = "did nothing"} //mock the action
def res = rule.execute2()
then the test passes.
outside of spock i just ran a simple groovy script and did the method overload and that works correctly as id expect and the method is mocked out with the closure
class A {
def execute () {
println "thing"
}
}
def c = new A()
def res
c.execute()
c.metaClass.execute = {-> res =2 ; println "modified thing "; }
c.execute ()
println "res = "+ res
why doesn't the same happen in the spock test ?
query - how do unit stub test a closure correctly for spock ?
this modified version of the test works successfully
def "test default execution " (){
given : "basic AORule "
def mockres
def stub = new StubFor(AORule)
stub.demand.execute { mockres = "did nothing" }
// rule.metaClass.execute = {-> mockres = "did nothing"} //mock the action
// def res = rule.execute()
expect : "execute should do nothing "
stub.use {
rule.execute()
mockres == "did nothing"
}
}
why didn't the simple per metaclass frig work in spock ? Something i'm not understanding here
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire