Test a nested method call on a mocked class using ScalaMock - scala

I am new to both ScalaMock and mocking in general. I am trying to test a method which calls a method in another (mocked) class and then calls a method on the returned object.
Detailed information:
So I am using ScalaTest and there are five classes involved in this test...
SubInstruction which I am testing
class SubInstruction(label: String, val result: Int, val op1: Int, val op2: Int) extends Instruction(label, "sub") {
override def execute(m: Machine) {
val value1 = m.regs(op1)
val value2 = m.regs(op2)
m.regs(result) = value1 - value2
}
}
object SubInstruction {
def apply(label: String, result: Int, op1: Int, op2: Int) =
new SubInstruction(label, result, op1, op2)
}
Machine which must be mocked for the test
case class Machine(labels: Labels, prog: Vector[Instruction]) {
private final val NUMBEROFREGISTERS = 32
val regs: Registers = new Registers(NUMBEROFREGISTERS)
override def toString(): String = {
prog.foldLeft("")(_ + _)
}
def execute(start: Int) =
start.until(prog.length).foreach(x => prog(x) execute this)
}
object Machine extends App {
if (args.length == 0) {
println("Machine: args should be sml code file to execute")
} else {
println("SML interpreter - Scala version")
val m = Translator(args(0)).readAndTranslate(new Machine(Labels(), Vector()))
println("Here is the program; it has " + m.prog.size + " instructions.")
println(m)
println("Beginning program execution.")
m.execute(0)
println("Ending program execution.")
println("Values of registers at program termination:")
println(m.regs + ".")
}
}
Registers which is required to construct a Machine object
case class Registers(size: Int) {
val registers: Array[Int] = new Array(size)
override def toString(): String =
registers.mkString(" ")
def update(k: Int, v: Int) = registers(k) = v
def apply(k: Int) = registers(k)
}
MockableMachine which I have created as the original Machine class does not have an empty constructor and therefore (as I understand) can not be mocked
class MockableMachine extends Machine(Labels(), Vector()){
}
and finally my test class SubInstructionTest which compiles but throws the exception below.
class SubInstructionTest extends FlatSpec with MockFactory with Matchers {
val label1 = "f0"
val result1 = 25
val op1_1 = 24
val op2_1 = 20
val sub1 = SubInstruction(label1, result1, op1_1, op2_1)
"A SubInstruction" should "retrieve the operands from the correct registers in the given machine " +
"when execute(m: Machine) is called, and perform the operation saving the " +
"result in the correct register." in {
val mockMachine = mock[MockableMachine]
inSequence {
(mockMachine.regs.apply _).expects(op1_1).returning(50)
(mockMachine.regs.apply _).expects(op2_1).returning(16)
(mockMachine.regs.update _).expects(result1, 34)
}
sub1.execute(mockMachine)
}
}
Throws:
java.lang.NoSuchMethodException: Registers.mock$apply$0()
-
I have been searching for a straightforward way to mock this class for hours, but have found nothing. For the time being I have settled on the workaround detailed below, but I was under the impression that mocking would offer a less convoluted solution to the problem of testing my SubInstruction class.
The workaround:
Delete the MockableMachine class and create a CustomMachine class which extends Machine and replaces the registers value with mockedRegisters provided at construction time.
class CustomMachine (mockedRegister: Registers) extends Machine(Labels(), Vector()) {
override
val regs: Registers = mockedRegister
}
a MockableRegisters class which I have created as the original does not have an empty constructor and therefore (as I understand) can not be mocked
class MockableRegisters extends Registers(32) {
}
and the SubInstructionTest class written in a slightly different way
class SubInstructionTest extends FlatSpec with MockFactory with Matchers {
val label1 = "f0"
val result1 = 25
val op1_1 = 24
val op2_1 = 20
val sub1 = SubInstruction(label1, result1, op1_1, op2_1)
"A SubInstruction" should "retrieve the operands from the correct registers in the given machine " +
"when execute(m: Machine) is called, and perform the operation saving the " +
"result in the correct register." in {
val mockRegisters = mock[MockableRegisters]
val machine = new CustomMachine(mockRegisters)
inSequence {
(mockRegisters.apply _).expects(op1_1).returning(50)
(mockRegisters.apply _).expects(op2_1).returning(16)
(mockRegisters.update _).expects(result1, 34)
}
sub1.execute(machine)
}
}
As indicated, this feels like a workaround to me, is there not a simpler way to do this (perhaps similar to my original attempt)?
I have just included the essential code to ask the question, but you can find the full code on my GitHub account.

I don't think mocking nested objects is supported by Scalamock implicitly. You'll have to mock the object returned by the first call which is what your working example does.
FWIW, Mockito supports this. Search for RETURNS_DEEP_STUBS.

Related

Create instance of child from parent class

I am building a simple DSL for length operations. I want the domain operations to be extensible, so I am using them as mixins along with the implicit conversions for my domain components.
1. Below is my App.
package com.shasank.funWithLengths
object LengthAdditionApp extends App{
val length1 = 11 inches
val length2 = 15 inches
val length3 = 2 feet
println(length1)
println(length2)
println(length3)
println(length1 + length2) // all ok
println(length1 + length3) // all ok
println(length3 - length1) // all ok
println(length1 + length2 + length2) // this breaks since object returned from first operation doesn't have adder
}
Below is my base class. I would have loved this to be abstract, but since I could not find a way to create instance of subclass Inches, I marked the constructor protected, so that only subclasses can extend it and nothing else can create an instance.
package com.shasank.funWithLengths
class Length protected(val measure: Int, val unit: String) {
private def convertToInches(length: Length)= length.unit match {
case "feet" => length.measure * 12
case "inches" => length.measure
}
protected def operateOnMeasures(other: Length, op: (Int,Int) => Int): Length ={
val thisInches = convertToInches(this)
val otherInches = convertToInches(other)
val operatedMeasure = op(thisInches,otherInches)
new Length(operatedMeasure, "inches") // object created does not have adder & subtracter capabilities
}
override def toString = {
val measureInInches = convertToInches(this)
val (feetMeasure, inchesMeasure) = BigInt(measureInInches) /% 12
val feetMeasureString = s"$feetMeasure feet and"
val inchesMeasureString = s"$inchesMeasure inches"
s"$feetMeasureString $inchesMeasureString"
}
}
Below are my domain components.
package com.shasank
package object funWithLengths {
implicit class Inches(measure: Int) extends Length(measure, "inches") with Adder with Subtracter {
def inches = this
}
implicit class Feet(measure: Int) extends Length(measure, "feet") with Adder with Subtracter {
def feet = this
}
}
Below are my domain operators.
package com.shasank.funWithLengths
trait Adder extends Length {
def +(other: Length) = super.operateOnMeasures(other, _+_)
}
package com.shasank.funWithLengths
trait Subtracter extends Length {
def -(other: Length) = super.operateOnMeasures(other, _-_)
}
Question: Is there a way to create an instance of Inches (so that I can get all the goodies of it) while returning from the method operateOnMeasures in my base class Length?
I was able to resolve this by moving the Length class inside the package object where I declared the implicit classes Inches and Feet.
Here is link to my working
code

Scala reflect string to singleton object

I'm looking for a way to convert a Scala singleton object given as a string (for example: package1.Main) to the actual instance of Main, so that I can invoke methods on it.
Example of the problem:
package x {
object Main extends App {
val objectPath: String = io.StdIn.readLine("Give an object: ") // user enters: x.B
// how to convert the objectPath (String) to a variable that references singleton B?
val b1: A = magicallyConvert1(objectPath)
b1.hi()
val b2: B.type = magicallyConvert2(objectPath)
b2.extra()
}
trait A {
def hi() = {}
}
object B extends A {
def extra() = {}
}
}
How can the magicallyConvert1 and magicallyConvert2 functions be implemented?
For a normal class, this can be done using something like:
val b: A = Class.forName("x.B").newInstance().asInstanceOf[A]
But I found a solution for singletons, using Java reflections:
A singleton is accesible in Java under the name:
package.SingletonName$.MODULE$
So you have to append "$.MODULE$", which is a static field.
So we can use standard Java reflections to get it.
So the solution is:
def magicallyConvert1(objectPath: String) = {
val clz = Class.forName(objectPath + "$")
val field = clz.getField("MODULE$")
val b: A = field.get(null).asInstanceOf[A]
b
}
def magicallyConvert2(objectPath: String) = {
val clz = Class.forName(objectPath + "$")
val field = clz.getField("MODULE$")
val b: B.type = field.get(null).asInstanceOf[B.type]
b
}
But it would be interesting to still see a solution with Scala-Reflect en Scala-Meta.
take a look at scalameta http://scalameta.org it does what you want and more

Dynamic object method invocation using reflection in scala

I'm looking to create a way to dynamically call logic depending on template id within scala. So template id 1 calls logic a, template id 2 call logic b, etc. The logic will be diverse but will have the same inputs/outputs. Also the number of different template ids will get into the thousands and will not be known ahead of time, so a loose coupling feels the way to go.
I've started looking at reflection to do this using scala 2.11.1 and can statically use reflection when I know the logic to be used ahead of time but have not found the correct way to dynamically use reflection, so for example passing in template id 2 will call logic b.
Below is a cut down example showing how the static version works and the skeleton I have so far for the dynamic version.
package thePackage
import scala.reflect.runtime.{universe => ru}
trait theTrait { def theMethod(x: String): Unit }
// the different logic held in different objects
object object1 extends theTrait {
def theMethod(x: String) = { println("a " + x ) }
}
object object2 extends theTrait {
def theMethod(x: String) = { println("b " + x ) }
}
object object3 extends theTrait {
def theMethod(x: String) = { println("c " + x ) }
}
// run static/dynamic reflection methods
object ReflectionTest {
// "static" invocation calling object1.theMethod
def staticInvocation() = {
val m = ru.runtimeMirror(getClass.getClassLoader)
val im = m.reflect(thePackage.object1)
val method = ru.typeOf[thePackage.object1.type]
.decl(ru.TermName("theMethod")).asMethod
val methodRun = im.reflectMethod(method)
methodRun("test")
}
staticInvocation
// "dynamic" invocation using integer to call different methods
def dynamicInvocation( y: Integer) = {
val m = ru.runtimeMirror(getClass.getClassLoader)
val module = m.staticModule("thePackage.object" + y)
val im = m.reflectModule(module)
// stuck... static approach does not work here
}
dynamicInvocation(1)
dynamicInvocation(2)
dynamicInvocation(3)
}
What needs to be added/changed to the dynamicInvocation method to make this work, or should I be using a different approach?
You need to get an instance mirror for your module, on which you can reflect the method.
def dynamicInvocation( y: Integer) = {
val m = ru.runtimeMirror(getClass.getClassLoader)
val module = m.staticModule("thePackage.object" + y)
val im = m.reflectModule(module)
val method = im.symbol.info.decl(ru.TermName("theMethod")).asMethod
val objMirror = m.reflect(im.instance)
objMirror.reflectMethod(method)("test")
}
It seems that TermName method in above solution has been replaced by newTermName and also the info.decl seems to not work. Below line worked for me
val method = im.symbol.typeSignature.member(ru.newTermName("testMethod")).asMethod

Possible to conditionally elide out a subclass method?

In Scala, I'd like to have a subclass method conditionally elided out (and revert to the base class implementation) based on the command line priority. As an example, suppose I have the following code:
// File: mini.scala
import scala.annotation._, elidable._
trait FooBase {
def bar(msg: String) = println("FooBase: " + msg)
}
object Foo extends FooBase {
#elidable(INFO)
override def bar(msg: String) = println("Foo: " + msg)
}
object App {
def main(args: Array[String]) {
println("before")
Foo.bar("message")
println("after")
}
}
If I compile with:
scalac -Xelide-below MINIMUM mini.scala
And run it, I see (as expected):
before
Foo: message
after
Now if I compile with:
scalac -Xelide-below MAXIMUM mini.scala
Then, I hoped to see:
before
FooBase: message
after
But I actually see:
before
after
So instead of just the subclass method being elided out (as hoped) the base class seems to be gone too.
Any explanation appreciated.
Based on the response from #som-snytt, it seems that the best way to achieve the effect I'm after is something like:
trait DebugBase {
def on = false
}
object Debug extends DebugBase {
#elidable(INFO)
override def on = true
}
object Foo {
def bar(msg: String) = if (Debug.on) println("Foo (Debug): " + msg) else println("Foo: " + msg)
}
But then there is still a runtime check on the status of Debug.on instead of completely eliding out the debug version as you might with an #ifdef in C/C++.
That's a good one. I've looked at the mechanism once upon a time, but I wasn't sure about the use case.
The answer is commented:
/** Called if a tree's symbol is elidable. If it's a DefDef,
* replace only the body/rhs with 0/false/()/null; otherwise replace
* the whole tree with it.
*/
So in eliding Foo.bar, you don't remove the method definition. You merely turn it into def bar = () and any invocation into the unit value ().
You can elide a template method usefully:
scala> class X { def f() = { if (g() < 1) println("default") } ; def g() = 1 }
defined class X
scala> :se -Xelide-below 200
scala> class Y extends X { #elidable(100) override def g() = 2 }
defined class Y
scala> new Y().f()
default
scala> :se -Xelide-below 5
scala> class Y extends X { #elidable(100) override def g() = 2 }
defined class Y
scala> new Y().f()

Mixing in a trait dynamically

Having a trait
trait Persisted {
def id: Long
}
how do I implement a method that accepts an instance of any case class and returns its copy with the trait mixed in?
The signature of the method looks like:
def toPersisted[T](instance: T, id: Long): T with Persisted
This can be done with macros (that are officially a part of Scala since 2.10.0-M3). Here's a gist example of what you are looking for.
1) My macro generates a local class that inherits from the provided case class and Persisted, much like new T with Persisted would do. Then it caches its argument (to prevent multiple evaluations) and creates an instance of the created class.
2) How did I know what trees to generate? I have a simple app, parse.exe that prints the AST that results from parsing input code. So I just invoked parse class Person$Persisted1(first: String, last: String) extends Person(first, last) with Persisted, noted the output and reproduced it in my macro. parse.exe is a wrapper for scalac -Xprint:parser -Yshow-trees -Ystop-after:parser. There are different ways to explore ASTs, read more in "Metaprogramming in Scala 2.10".
3) Macro expansions can be sanity-checked if you provide -Ymacro-debug-lite as an argument to scalac. In that case all expansions will be printed out, and you'll be able to detect codegen errors faster.
edit. Updated the example for 2.10.0-M7
It is not possible to achieve what you want using vanilla scala. The problem is that the mixins like the following:
scala> class Foo
defined class Foo
scala> trait Bar
defined trait Bar
scala> val fooWithBar = new Foo with Bar
fooWithBar: Foo with Bar = $anon$1#10ef717
create a Foo with Bar mixed in, but it is not done at runtime. The compiler simply generates a new anonymous class:
scala> fooWithBar.getClass
res3: java.lang.Class[_ <: Foo] = class $anon$1
See Dynamic mixin in Scala - is it possible? for more info.
What you are trying to do is known as record concatenation, something that Scala's type system does not support. (Fwiw, there exist type systems - such as this and this - that provide this feature.)
I think type classes might fit your use case, but I cannot tell for sure as the question doesn't provide sufficient information on what problem you are trying to solve.
Update
You can find an up to date working solution, which utilizes a Toolboxes API of Scala 2.10.0-RC1 as part of SORM project.
The following solution is based on the Scala 2.10.0-M3 reflection API and Scala Interpreter. It dynamically creates and caches classes inheriting from the original case classes with the trait mixed in. Thanks to caching at maximum this solution should dynamically create only one class for each original case class and reuse it later.
Since the new reflection API isn't that much disclosed nor is it stable and there are no tutorials on it yet this solution may involve some stupid repitative actions and quirks.
The following code was tested with Scala 2.10.0-M3.
1. Persisted.scala
The trait to be mixed in. Please note that I've changed it a bit due to updates in my program
trait Persisted {
def key: String
}
2. PersistedEnabler.scala
The actual worker object
import tools.nsc.interpreter.IMain
import tools.nsc._
import reflect.mirror._
object PersistedEnabler {
def toPersisted[T <: AnyRef](instance: T, key: String)
(implicit instanceTag: TypeTag[T]): T with Persisted = {
val args = {
val valuesMap = propertyValuesMap(instance)
key ::
methodParams(constructors(instanceTag.tpe).head.typeSignature)
.map(_.name.decoded.trim)
.map(valuesMap(_))
}
persistedClass(instanceTag)
.getConstructors.head
.newInstance(args.asInstanceOf[List[Object]]: _*)
.asInstanceOf[T with Persisted]
}
private val persistedClassCache =
collection.mutable.Map[TypeTag[_], Class[_]]()
private def persistedClass[T](tag: TypeTag[T]): Class[T with Persisted] = {
if (persistedClassCache.contains(tag))
persistedClassCache(tag).asInstanceOf[Class[T with Persisted]]
else {
val name = generateName()
val code = {
val sourceParams =
methodParams(constructors(tag.tpe).head.typeSignature)
val newParamsList = {
def paramDeclaration(s: Symbol): String =
s.name.decoded + ": " + s.typeSignature.toString
"val key: String" :: sourceParams.map(paramDeclaration) mkString ", "
}
val sourceParamsList =
sourceParams.map(_.name.decoded).mkString(", ")
val copyMethodParamsList =
sourceParams.map(s => s.name.decoded + ": " + s.typeSignature.toString + " = " + s.name.decoded).mkString(", ")
val copyInstantiationParamsList =
"key" :: sourceParams.map(_.name.decoded) mkString ", "
"""
class """ + name + """(""" + newParamsList + """)
extends """ + tag.sym.fullName + """(""" + sourceParamsList + """)
with """ + typeTag[Persisted].sym.fullName + """ {
override def copy(""" + copyMethodParamsList + """) =
new """ + name + """(""" + copyInstantiationParamsList + """)
}
"""
}
interpreter.compileString(code)
val c =
interpreter.classLoader.findClass(name)
.asInstanceOf[Class[T with Persisted]]
interpreter.reset()
persistedClassCache(tag) = c
c
}
}
private lazy val interpreter = {
val settings = new Settings()
settings.usejavacp.value = true
new IMain(settings, new NewLinePrintWriter(new ConsoleWriter, true))
}
private var generateNameCounter = 0l
private def generateName() = synchronized {
generateNameCounter += 1
"PersistedAnonymous" + generateNameCounter.toString
}
// REFLECTION HELPERS
private def propertyNames(t: Type) =
t.members.filter(m => !m.isMethod && m.isTerm).map(_.name.decoded.trim)
private def propertyValuesMap[T <: AnyRef](instance: T) = {
val t = typeOfInstance(instance)
propertyNames(t)
.map(n => n -> invoke(instance, t.member(newTermName(n)))())
.toMap
}
private type MethodType = {def params: List[Symbol]; def resultType: Type}
private def methodParams(t: Type): List[Symbol] =
t.asInstanceOf[MethodType].params
private def methodResultType(t: Type): Type =
t.asInstanceOf[MethodType].resultType
private def constructors(t: Type): Iterable[Symbol] =
t.members.filter(_.kind == "constructor")
private def fullyQualifiedName(s: Symbol): String = {
def symbolsTree(s: Symbol): List[Symbol] =
if (s.enclosingTopLevelClass != s)
s :: symbolsTree(s.enclosingTopLevelClass)
else if (s.enclosingPackageClass != s)
s :: symbolsTree(s.enclosingPackageClass)
else
Nil
symbolsTree(s)
.reverseMap(_.name.decoded)
.drop(1)
.mkString(".")
}
}
3. Sandbox.scala
The test app
import PersistedEnabler._
object Sandbox extends App {
case class Artist(name: String, genres: Set[Genre])
case class Genre(name: String)
val artist = Artist("Nirvana", Set(Genre("rock"), Genre("grunge")))
val persisted = toPersisted(artist, "some-key")
assert(persisted.isInstanceOf[Persisted])
assert(persisted.isInstanceOf[Artist])
assert(persisted.key == "some-key")
assert(persisted.name == "Nirvana")
assert(persisted == artist) // an interesting and useful effect
val copy = persisted.copy(name = "Puddle of Mudd")
assert(copy.isInstanceOf[Persisted])
assert(copy.isInstanceOf[Artist])
// the only problem: compiler thinks that `copy` does not implement `Persisted`, so to access `key` we have to specify it manually:
assert(copy.asInstanceOf[Artist with Persisted].key == "some-key")
assert(copy.name == "Puddle of Mudd")
assert(copy != persisted)
}
While it's not possible to compose an object AFTER it's creation, you can have very wide tests to determine if the object is of a specific composition using type aliases and definition structs:
type Persisted = { def id: Long }
class Person {
def id: Long = 5
def name = "dude"
}
def persist(obj: Persisted) = {
obj.id
}
persist(new Person)
Any object with a def id:Long will qualify as Persisted.
Achieving what I THINK you are trying to do is possible with implicit conversions:
object Persistable {
type Compatible = { def id: Long }
implicit def obj2persistable(obj: Compatible) = new Persistable(obj)
}
class Persistable(val obj: Persistable.Compatible) {
def persist() = println("Persisting: " + obj.id)
}
import Persistable.obj2persistable
new Person().persist()