Testing Private method using mockito

public class A {

    public void method(boolean b){
          if (b == true)
               method1();
          else
               method2();
    }

    private void method1() {}
    private void method2() {}
}
public class TestA {

    @Test
    public void testMethod() {
      A a = mock(A.class);
      a.method(true);
      //how to test like    verify(a).method1();
    }
}

How to test private method is called or not, and how to test private method using mockito???

Answers


You can't do that with Mockito but you can use Powermock to extend Mockito and mock private methods. Powermock supports Mockito. Here's an example.


Not possible through mockito. From their wiki

Why Mockito doesn't mock private methods?

Firstly, we are not dogmatic about mocking private methods. We just don't care about private methods because from the standpoint of testing private methods don't exist. Here are a couple of reasons Mockito doesn't mock private methods:

It requires hacking of classloaders that is never bullet proof and it changes the api (you must use custom test runner, annotate the class, etc.).

It is very easy to work around - just change the visibility of method from private to package-protected (or protected).

It requires me to spend time implementing & maintaining it. And it does not make sense given point #2 and a fact that it is already implemented in different tool (powermock).

Finally... Mocking private methods is a hint that there is something wrong with OO understanding. In OO you want objects (or roles) to collaborate, not methods. Forget about pascal & procedural code. Think in objects.


Here is a small example how to do it with powermock

public class Hello {
    private Hello obj;
    private Integer method1(Long id) {
        return id + 10;
    }
} 

To test method1 use code:

Hello testObj = new Hello();
Integer result = Whitebox.invokeMethod(testObj, "method1", new Long(10L));

To set private object obj use this:

Hello testObj = new Hello();
Hello newObject = new Hello();
Whitebox.setInternalState(testObj, "obj", newObject);

Think about this in terms of behaviour, not in terms of what methods there are. The method called method has a particular behaviour if b is true. It has different behaviour if b is false. This means you should write two different tests for method; one for each case. So instead of having three method-oriented tests (one for method, one for method1, one for method2, you have two behaviour-oriented tests.

Related to this (I suggested this in another SO thread recently, and got called a four-letter word as a result, so feel free to take this with a grain of salt); I find it helpful to choose test names that reflect the behaviour that I'm testing, rather than the name of the method. So don't call your tests testMethod(), testMethod1(), testMethod2() and so forth. I like names like calculatedPriceIsBasePricePlusTax() or taxIsExcludedWhenExcludeIsTrue() that indicate what behaviour I'm testing; then within each test method, test only the indicated behaviour. Most such behaviours will involve just one call to a public method, but may involve many calls to private methods.

Hope this helps.


You're not suppose to test private methods. Only non-private methods needs to be tested as these should call the private methods anyway. If you "want" to test private methods, it may indicate that you need to rethink your design:

Am I using proper dependency injection? Do I possibly needs to move the private methods into a separate class and rather test that? Must these methods be private? ...can't they be default or protected rather?

In the above instance, the two methods that are called "randomly" may actually need to be placed in a class of their own, tested and then injected into the class above.


I was able to test a private method inside using mockito using reflection. Here is the example, tried to name it such that it makes sense

//Service containing the mock method is injected with mockObjects

@InjectMocks
private ServiceContainingPrivateMethod serviceContainingPrivateMethod;

//Using reflection to change accessibility of the private method

Class<?>[] params = new Class<?>[]{PrivateMethodParameterOne.class, PrivateMethodParameterTwo.class};
    Method m = serviceContainingPrivateMethod .getClass().getDeclaredMethod("privateMethod", params);
    //making private method accessible
    m.setAccessible(true); 
    assertNotNull(m.invoke(serviceContainingPrivateMethod, privateMethodParameterOne, privateMethodParameterTwo).equals(null));

While Mockito doesn't provide that capability, you can achieve the same result using Mockito + the JUnit ReflectionUtils class or the Spring ReflectionTestUtils class. Please see an example below taken from here explaining how to invoke a private method:

ReflectionTestUtils.invokeMethod(student, "saveOrUpdate", "From Unit test");

Complete examples with ReflectionTestUtils and Mockito can be found in the book Mockito for Spring


I don't really understand your need to test the private method. The root problem is that your public method has void as return type, and hence you are not able to test your public method. Hence you are forced to test your private method. Is my guess correct??

A few possible solutions (AFAIK):

  1. Mocking your private methods, but still you won't be "actually" testing your methods.

  2. Verify the state of object used in the method. MOSTLY methods either do some processing of the input values and return an output, or change the state of the objects. Testing the objects for the desired state can also be employed.

    public class A{
    
    SomeClass classObj = null;
    
    public void publicMethod(){
       privateMethod();
    }
    
    private void privateMethod(){
         classObj = new SomeClass();
    }
    
    }
    

    [Here you can test for the private method, by checking the state change of the classObj from null to not null.]

  3. Refactor your code a little (Hope this is not a legacy code). My funda of writing a method is that, one should always return something (a int/ a boolean). The returned value MAY or MAY NOT be used by the implementation, but it will SURELY BE used by the test

    code.

    public class A
    { 
        public int method(boolean b)
        {
              int nReturn = 0;
              if (b == true)
                   nReturn = method1();
              else
                   nReturn = method2();
        }
    
        private int method1() {}
    
        private int method2() {}
    
    }
    

Put your test in the same package, but a different source folder (src/main/java vs. src/test/java) and make those methods package-private. Imo testability is more important than privacy.


There is actually a way to test methods from a private member with Mockito. Let's say you have a class like this:

public class A {
    private SomeOtherClass someOtherClass;
    A() {
        someOtherClass = new SomeOtherClass();
    }
    public void method(boolean b){
        if (b == true)
            someOtherClass.method1();
        else
            someOtherClass.method2();
    }

}

public class SomeOtherClass {
    public void method1() {}
    public void method2() {}
}

If you want to test a.method will invoke a method from SomeOtherClass, you can write something like below.

@Test
public void testPrivateMemberMethodCalled() {
    A a = new A();
    SomeOtherClass someOtherClass = Mockito.spy(new SomeOtherClass());
    ReflectionTestUtils.setField( a, "someOtherClass", someOtherClass);
    a.method( true );

    Mockito.verify( someOtherClass, Mockito.times( 1 ) ).method1();
}

ReflectionTestUtils.setField(); will stub the private member with something you can spy on.


Need Your Help

Cancellation token in Task constructor: why?

c# .net-4.0 task-parallel-library cancellation-token

Certain System.Threading.Tasks.Task constructors take a CancellationToken as a parameter: