Using Kotlin extensions in Groovy

Extensions in Kotlin and GroovyKotlin and Groovy have mechanisms for extending existing classes without using inheritance or decorators. In both languages, the mechanisms are called extension methods. Their source code looks different, but generated by…

Using Kotlin extensions in Groovy

Extensions in Kotlin and Groovy

Kotlin and Groovy have mechanisms for extending existing classes without using inheritance or decorators. In both languages, the mechanisms are called extension methods. Their source code looks different, but generated bytecode is quite similar. Thanks to that, Groovy is able to use Kotlin extensions just like its own.

Why would I want to use such extensions in Groovy? The main reason is that I want to test my extensions using the best testing framework available for the JVM – Spock Framework.

Code is available here.

Extensions in Kotlin

There are many types of extensions in Kotlin. I decided to focus only on extension functions and properties.

As an example, I extend the java.lang.String class. First, I create an extension function skipFirst, which skips first N characters:

fun String.skipFirst(n: Int) = if (length > n) this.substring(n) else ""

 

Next, I create an extension property answer, which is the Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything:

val String.answer
    get() = 42

Both extensions are declared in package com.github.alien11689.extensions, in file called StringExtensions. However, the generated class in target directory is named StringExtensionsKt and this is the name that must be used when accessing from other languages. Specific class name can be forced by annotation @file:JvmName.

Using Kotlin extensions in Groovy

There are two ways for using extensions in Groovy that are supported by good IDEs. First, you can declare scope where the extensions are available by use method:

def "should use extension method"() {
    expect:
        use(StringExtensionsKt) {
            input.skipFirst(n) == expected
        }
    where:
        input  | n | expected
        "abcd" | 3 | "d"
        "abcd" | 6 | ""
        ""     | 3 | ""
}

def "should use extension property"() {
    expect:
        use(StringExtensionsKt) {
            "abcd".answer == 42
        }
}

It is acceptable, but is not very convenient. The second and much better way is to use an extension module definition. The extension module is defined in file org.codehaus.groovy.runtime.ExtensionModule in directory src/main/resources/META-INF/services/. The same directory is monitored by ServiceLoader, but the file format is completely different:

moduleName=string-extension-module
moduleVersion=1.0.0
extensionClasses=com.github.alien11689.extensions.StringExtensionsKt

The tests look much better now:

def "should use extension method"() {
    expect:
        input.skipFirst(n) == expected
    where:
        input  | n | expected
        "abcd" | 3 | "d"
        "abcd" | 6 | ""
        ""     | 3 | ""
}

def "should use extension property"() {
    expect:
        "abcd".answer == 42
}
You May Also Like

Thought static method can’t be easy to mock, stub nor track? Wrong!

No matter why, no matter is it a good idea. Sometimes one just wants to check or it's necessary to be done. Mock a static method, woot? Impossibru!

In pure Java world it is still a struggle. But Groovy allows you to do that really simple. Well, not groovy alone, but with a great support of Spock.

Lets move on straight to the example. To catch some context we have an abstract for the example needs. A marketing project with a set of offers. One to many.

import spock.lang.Specification

class OfferFacadeSpec extends Specification {

    OfferFacade facade = new OfferFacade()

    def setup() {
        GroovyMock(Project, global: true)
    }

    def 'delegates an add offer call to the domain with proper params'() {
        given:
            Map params = [projId: projectId, name: offerName]

        when:
            Offer returnedOffer = facade.add(params)

        then:
            1 * Project.addOffer(projectId, _) >> { projId, offer -> offer }
            returnedOffer.name == params.name

        where:
            projectId | offerName
            1         | 'an Offer'
            15        | 'whasup!?'
            123       | 'doskonała oferta - kup teraz!'
    }
}
So we test a facade responsible for handling "add offer to the project" call triggered  somewhere in a GUI.
We want to ensure that static method Project.addOffer(long, Offer) will receive correct params when java.util.Map with user form input comes to the facade.add(params).
This is unit test, so how Project.addOffer() works is out of scope. Thus we want to stub it.

The most important is a GroovyMock(Project, global: true) statement.
What it does is modifing Project class to behave like a Spock's mock. 
GroovyMock() itself is a method inherited from SpecificationThe global flag is necessary to enable mocking static methods.
However when one comes to the need of mocking static method, author of Spock Framework advice to consider redesigning of implementation. It's not a bad advice, I must say.

Another important thing are assertions at then: block. First one checks an interaction, if the Project.addOffer() method was called exactly once, with a 1st argument equal to the projectId and some other param (we don't have an object instance yet to assert anything about it).
Right shit operator leads us to the stub which replaces original method implementation by such statement.
As a good stub it does nothing. The original method definition has return type Offer. The stub needs to do the same. So an offer passed as the 2nd argument is just returned.
Thanks to this we can assert about name property if it's equal with the value from params. If no return was designed the name could be checked inside the stub Closure, prefixed with an assert keyword.

Worth of  mentioning is that if you want to track interactions of original static method implementation without replacing it, then you should try using GroovySpy instead of GroovyMock.

Unfortunately static methods declared at Java object can't be treated in such ways. Though regular mocks and whole goodness of Spock can be used to test pure Java code, which is awesome anyway :)No matter why, no matter is it a good idea. Sometimes one just wants to check or it's necessary to be done. Mock a static method, woot? Impossibru!

In pure Java world it is still a struggle. But Groovy allows you to do that really simple. Well, not groovy alone, but with a great support of Spock.

Lets move on straight to the example. To catch some context we have an abstract for the example needs. A marketing project with a set of offers. One to many.

import spock.lang.Specification

class OfferFacadeSpec extends Specification {

    OfferFacade facade = new OfferFacade()

    def setup() {
        GroovyMock(Project, global: true)
    }

    def 'delegates an add offer call to the domain with proper params'() {
        given:
            Map params = [projId: projectId, name: offerName]

        when:
            Offer returnedOffer = facade.add(params)

        then:
            1 * Project.addOffer(projectId, _) >> { projId, offer -> offer }
            returnedOffer.name == params.name

        where:
            projectId | offerName
            1         | 'an Offer'
            15        | 'whasup!?'
            123       | 'doskonała oferta - kup teraz!'
    }
}
So we test a facade responsible for handling "add offer to the project" call triggered  somewhere in a GUI.
We want to ensure that static method Project.addOffer(long, Offer) will receive correct params when java.util.Map with user form input comes to the facade.add(params).
This is unit test, so how Project.addOffer() works is out of scope. Thus we want to stub it.

The most important is a GroovyMock(Project, global: true) statement.
What it does is modifing Project class to behave like a Spock's mock. 
GroovyMock() itself is a method inherited from SpecificationThe global flag is necessary to enable mocking static methods.
However when one comes to the need of mocking static method, author of Spock Framework advice to consider redesigning of implementation. It's not a bad advice, I must say.

Another important thing are assertions at then: block. First one checks an interaction, if the Project.addOffer() method was called exactly once, with a 1st argument equal to the projectId and some other param (we don't have an object instance yet to assert anything about it).
Right shit operator leads us to the stub which replaces original method implementation by such statement.
As a good stub it does nothing. The original method definition has return type Offer. The stub needs to do the same. So an offer passed as the 2nd argument is just returned.
Thanks to this we can assert about name property if it's equal with the value from params. If no return was designed the name could be checked inside the stub Closure, prefixed with an assert keyword.

Worth of  mentioning is that if you want to track interactions of original static method implementation without replacing it, then you should try using GroovySpy instead of GroovyMock.

Unfortunately static methods declared at Java object can't be treated in such ways. Though regular mocks and whole goodness of Spock can be used to test pure Java code, which is awesome anyway :)

EhCache config with BeanUtils

BeanUtils allows you to set Bean properties.If you have configuration stored in a Map it's tempting to use BeanUtils to automagically setup EhCache configuration.Sadly this class has mixed types in setters and getter and thus BeanUtils that use Introsp...