Looks like a viable alternative. I will try it later. Thanks Gerhard!
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Gerhard Petracek < [email protected]> wrote: > hi michael, > > i haven't tested your use-case, however, you can have a look at [1]. > > regards, > gerhard > > [1] > http://os890.blogspot.com/2014/05/add-on-mock-cdi-beans-with-deltaspike.html > > > > 2014-05-03 1:02 GMT+02:00 Michael Li <[email protected]>: > > I solved the problem by separating the repositories into another >> sub-project, where I run JUnit with "Test-Control", and the project with >> CDI beans is still tested using CDI-Unit. It's not perfect, but at least >> working now. >> >> >> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 1:10 AM, Karl Kildén <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > 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 >> > >> >> > > >> > > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Michael Li >> > > -- Michael Li
