I keep forgetting you can't disable the repositories like this :-) (at least I don't know how) Not sure if there's some trick or you need a separate module with only a dependency to data-api for mocked tests. Could ofc require some maven trickery to get working.
Otherwise the tests with mocks can always be plain Mockito I guess. On 1 May 2014 10:05, Karl Kildén <[email protected]> wrote: > OK, > > But per test case / suit with Test-Control it is possible to set > ProjectStage [1]. You can create a custom project stage and use it. Then > your mock can be project stage activated with @Exclude [2]. See [3] for > code example > > http://deltaspike.apache.org/projectstage.html [1] > http://deltaspike.apache.org/core.html#exclude [2] > > [3] > > @TestControl(projectStage = MockTest.class) > > > @Exclude(exceptIfProjectStage = MockTest.class) > public class MyMock implements DeltaspikeRepository{} > > > > On 1 May 2014 00:03, Michael Li <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Karl, >> >> Thanks for your reply. I guess you misunderstood my testing scenario. Let >> me make it more clear. >> >> * Main source: >> >> class A { >> @Inject B b; >> } >> >> class B {} >> >> >> * Test source: >> >> class ATest { >> @Inject A a; >> >> // I want inject this B mock into A >> @Produces @Mock // @Mock is Mockito annotation >> B b; >> } >> >> class BTest { >> @Inject B b; // my real B impl >> } >> >> The problem is that the container see two B instances: one from main >> source >> and another from the mock from testA. >> I know it shall work with some configuration as CDI-Unit does. However, >> CDI-Unit can not inject data repositories. >> >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Karl Kildén <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > @MyQualifier >> > @Inject >> > MyMock myMock >> > >> > Why make it hard for yourself? >> > >> > TestControl, @Exclude and different suits and project stages would be >> one >> > way also. >> > >> > Couldn't you also use BeanProvider to get the mock? >> > >> > For my app the tests that needs the real backend are in the jar with all >> > logic. They either need injects and real backends etc or I only need >> JUnit >> > and mockito. >> > >> > My web logic does not need db logic for tests so I have mocks with just >> > static entities. But here and there real backend is needed so I use >> mocks >> > with @Mock qualifier >> > >> > >> > >> > On 30 April 2014 22:04, Michael Li <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > Those looks like global setting to me. In my unit tests scenario, for >> > > example, class A has an association with class B, >> > > >> > > In unit test class ATest, I like to inject the real A and mocked B >> > > (produced in ATest class). >> > > In unit test class BTest, I need inject the real B (not the mocked) in >> > > order to test it. >> > > >> > > How does the container know when I need a real and when I need a >> mocked? >> > > Does the scope (e.g. RequestScope) help here? For example, set the >> > mocked B >> > > produced in BeanA in "RequestScope". >> > > >> > > Thanks. >> > > >> > > >> > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Gerhard Petracek < >> > > [email protected]> wrote: >> > > >> > > > hi michael, >> > > > >> > > > you can use std. cdi mechanisms like @Alternative beans for your >> mocks. >> > > > just add and configure them in your test-module. >> > > > or use @Exclude(exceptIfProjectStage = ProjectStage.UnitTest.class) >> > > > with that many projects could drop special mocking frameworks at >> all. >> > > > >> > > > regards, >> > > > gerhard >> > > > >> > > > http://www.irian.at >> > > > >> > > > Your JSF/JavaEE powerhouse - >> > > > JavaEE Consulting, Development and >> > > > Courses in English and German >> > > > >> > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > 2014-04-30 21:20 GMT+02:00 Michael Li <[email protected]>: >> > > > >> > > > > Hi Gerhard, >> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks for the reply. >> > > > > >> > > > > I did try the built-in test control. However it doesn't play well >> > with >> > > > mock >> > > > > framework like "Mockito". Basically the CDI container get confused >> > > > between >> > > > > a mocked bean and the real bean from my production code. I don't >> know >> > > how >> > > > > CDI-Unit solve the ambiguity, but the built-in test control >> didn't by >> > > > > default. If the built-in test control can work with mock with some >> > > > > configuration, I'd love to go with it. >> > > > > >> > > > > Michael. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Gerhard Petracek < >> > > > > [email protected]> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > hi michael, >> > > > > > >> > > > > > you could try [1] instead. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > regards, >> > > > > > gerhard >> > > > > > >> > > > > > [1] http://deltaspike.apache.org/test-control.html >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > http://www.irian.at >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Your JSF/JavaEE powerhouse - >> > > > > > JavaEE Consulting, Development and >> > > > > > Courses in English and German >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Professional Support for Apache MyFaces >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > 2014-04-30 20:24 GMT+02:00 Michael Li <[email protected]>: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > We're currently using CDI-Unit for CDI components testing. >> > > However, I >> > > > > > can't >> > > > > > > inject my data repository (interface) into my unit test >> classes. >> > I >> > > am >> > > > > > > wondering if there is anything special to setup (to work with >> > > > CDI-Unit) >> > > > > > or >> > > > > > > other approach to unit test repository. The exception I got is >> > > pasted >> > > > > as >> > > > > > > below. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > org.jboss.weld.exceptions.DeploymentException: WELD-001408: >> > > > Unsatisfied >> > > > > > > dependencies for type DomainRepository with qualifiers >> @Default >> > > > > > > at injection point [UnbackedAnnotatedField] @Inject >> > > > > > > >> com.acme.server.repository.DomainRepositoryTest.domainRepository >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> com.acme.server.repository.DomainRepositoryTest.domainRepository(DomainRepositoryTest.java:0) >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> org.jboss.weld.bootstrap.Validator.validateInjectionPointForDeploymentProblems(Validator.java:368) >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> org.jboss.weld.bootstrap.Validator.validateInjectionPoint(Validator.java:289) >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> org.jboss.weld.bootstrap.Validator.validateGeneralBean(Validator.java:135) >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > >> org.jboss.weld.bootstrap.Validator.validateRIBean(Validator.java:166) >> > > > > > > at >> > > > org.jboss.weld.bootstrap.Validator.validateBean(Validator.java:514) >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> org.jboss.weld.bootstrap.ConcurrentValidator$1.doWork(ConcurrentValidator.java:68) >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> org.jboss.weld.bootstrap.ConcurrentValidator$1.doWork(ConcurrentValidator.java:66) >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> org.jboss.weld.executor.IterativeWorkerTaskFactory$1.call(IterativeWorkerTaskFactory.java:60) >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> org.jboss.weld.executor.IterativeWorkerTaskFactory$1.call(IterativeWorkerTaskFactory.java:53) >> > > > > > > at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:266) >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1142) >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:617) >> > > > > > > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745) >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > Michael Li >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > -- >> > > > > Michael Li >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Michael Li >> > > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Michael Li >> > >
