I need to run some code whenever a property value is retrieved, so naturally it made sense to define the getProperty method in my class. This method will get automatically called whenever a property value is retrieved. Here's roughly what I have in my class:
class MyClass
{
def getProperty(String name)
{
// Run some code ...
return this.#"${name}"
}
}
The problem with the above method occurs when someone tries to make the following call somewhere:
MyClass.class
This call ends up in the getProperty method looking for a property named "class", however, there is not actual property named "class" so we get a MissingFieldException.
What would be the correct way to implement running code whenever a property value is retrieved and deal with these kind of situtations.
Best is not to have a getProperty method if not needed. If you need one and you want to fall back on standard Groovy logic, then you can use return getMetaClass().getProperty(this, property), as can be found in GroovyObjectSupport. This will cover more than just fields.
This seems to be a common problem with this method. Map has the same issue. The developers of groovy got around the problem with Map by saying you need to use getClass() directly.
Related
I would like to know is the thing in the description possible and how to do it.
I know you can call original method and then do the Answer like this:
when(presenter, "myMethod").doAnswer(<CUSTOMANSWER>)
but I would like to order them differently, first do CUSTOMANSWER and then call the original method.
For followers, it's actually possible to doAnswer and callRealMethod at the same time...
doAnswer(new Answer<Object>() {
public Object answer(InvocationOnMock invocationOnMock) throws Throwable {
invocationOnMock.callRealMethod(); // this one
return null;
}
}).when(subject).method(...);
You won't ever see when(...).doAnswer() in Mockito. Instead, you'll see either of the following, which includes the "call real method" behavior you're describing. As usual with Mockito stubbing, Mockito will select the most recent chain of calls that matches the method call and argument values in the invocation, and do each action in the chain once until the final action (which it will do for all calls afterwards.
// Normal Mockito syntax assuming "myMethod" is accessible. See caveat below.
when(presenter.myMethod()).thenAnswer(customAnswer).thenCallRealMethod();
// ...or...
doAnswer(customAnswer).doCallRealMethod().when(presenter).myMethod();
That said, there's a deficiency in the PowerMockito API that makes this difficult, because after the first doAnswer call all subsequent calls you get a normal Mockito Stubber instance rather than a PowerMockitoStubber instance. The bug 599 was misinterpreted, so for the time being you'll still have to make the cast yourself.
((PowerMockitoStubber) doAnswer(customAnswer).doCallRealMethod())
.when(presenter, "myMethod");
I am trying to mock a call to a protected method of one of my classes:
import com.couchbase.client.java.view.Stale; // an enum
import com.google.common.base.Optional;
public class MyClass {
public List<String> myList(Optional<Integer> arg1, Optional<Stale> arg2) {
...
}
}
The mock shall be accomplished in the following way:
// Providing types for any() does not change anything
Mockito.when(myClass.myList(Mockito.any(), Mockito.any()).thenReturn(new ArrayList());
Whenever the previous line is executed the actual myList() method is called with null values for arg1 and arg2. Why is the method called, at all? After all, I am trying to avoid any executing thereof...
As Brice mentioned, if your myList method is final, then Java skips virtual method dispatch and will call the original object (not your mock).
If you are spying on an actual class, it is expected behavior that when will call the actual object as part of the stub: after all, in the expression when(foo.bar()) Java doesn't know anything special about when and assumes that it cares about the return value) of foo.bar(), not the call itself. (I walk through the stubbing process in the "Implementation details" section of my answer here.)
This syntax is better for spies:
doReturn(new ArrayList()).when(myClass).myList(any(), any());
Because this different when method receives an object, Mockito can prepare the object to do nothing during the stubbing, which avoids any spurious calls to your myList method.
Although Jeff's answer did not show a workaround for my problem it pointed me into the right direction.
After changing the mocking behaviour to doReturn... I suddenly got an error message. This message told me that myClass is not a mock which makes sense since you can only mock (or stub?) methods of mocked or spied objects. So as Jeff's answer indicates and is explained in the documentation of mockito I created a partial mock of MyClass with
MyClass myClass = Mockito.spy(new MyClass());
With this partial mock Jeff's approach to method mocking suddenly worked (mine still does not and should therefore be avoided).
So: Thank you, Jeff!
I have a question that keeps bothering me. Currently, I have started using Kohana 3.2 Framework. I've written a helper to handle some functionality - I have a number of methods, which are (as it should be) declared STATIC. But, all of these methods are somehow working with the database, so I need to load a model. Currently, every method has a non-static variable like this:
$comment = new Model_Comments;
$comment->addComment("abc");
OK, it seems to be working, but then I wanted to get rid of this redundancy by using class attribute to hold the instance of the model (with is class as well).
Something like this:
private static $comment; // Declaring attribute
self::$comment = new Model_Comment; // This is done within helper __constuct method
self::$comment->addComment("abc"); // And call it within the method.
But, I got failed with: Call to a member function addComment() on a non-object
Question is: is it possible to do it ? Maybe there are some other approaches ?
Sorry for a long story and, thanks in advice! :P
A static method cannot call a non-static method without operating on an instance of the class. So, what you're proposing won't work. There may be a way do accomplish something similar, but what about trying the following:
You could implement the singleton or factory pattern for your "helper" class. Then, you could create the model (as an attribute) as you instantiate/return the instance. With an actual instance of your "helper" class, you won't have to worry about the static scope issues.
In other words, you can create a helper-like class as a "normal" class in your application that, upon creation, always has the necessary model available.
I'd be happy to help further if this approach makes sense.
David
Groovy noob here, I'm working through my first Groovy book and it has example code where it states roughly
"If I want a property to be a ready-only property then declare it final. This is not defining a final field but a read-only property-you can change the property from within instance methods of the defining class, but not from outside"
Here is the code I have in question, but I keep getting an error stating:
cannot modify final field 'miles' outside of constructor.
Code:
class Car
{
final miles = 0
def getMiles()
{
println "getMiles called"
miles
}
def drive(dist){if (dist>0) miles += dist }
}
The book says I should be able to modify miles from within the drive instance method, am I doing something wrong?
I think what they meant (not sure what they said, if you're paraphrasing) is that there's no setter method defined, so it can't be modified from outside the class.
It is, however, still a final property, which means it can't be modified once its set, which would be in a constructor or during the declaration.
Property and field rules
That said, see these two issues: 1628, 2752, so more exploration might be necessary, although this appears limited to local script properties.
My guess is you're using a 1.7+ Groovy, while the book targets <= 1.6.
See also this SO question.
I want to create an IDispatch object that returns a value for every property. Ask it for "foo", it returns something. "bar" returns something. "faid1jhgi31jifj" as well.
Any pointers?
You need to override the GetIDsForNames methods with an appropriate implementation that returns a valid DISPID for any input parameters. Then override the Invoke method to ensure to return the correct value based on the dispatch id.
You should also look at IDispatchEx, which is designed to give more flexibility for dynamic interfaces.