Testing Kotlin with Spock Part 2 – Enum with instance method

The enum class with instance method in Kotlin is quite similar to its Java version, but they are look a bit different in the bytecode. Let’s see the difference by writing some tests using Spock.What do we want to test?Let’s see the code that we want to…

Testing Kotlin with Spock Part 2 – Enum instance method

The enum class with instance method in Kotlin is quite similar to its Java version, but they are look a bit different in the bytecode. Let’s see the difference by writing some tests using Spock.

What do we want to test?

Let’s see the code that we want to test:

enum class EnumWithInstanceMethod {
    PLUS {
        override fun sign(): String = "+"
    },
    MINUS {
        override fun sign(): String = "-"
    };

    abstract fun sign(): String
}

Obviously, it can be written in a better way (e. g. using enum instance variable), but this example shows the case we want to test in the simplest way.

How to test it with Spock?

The simplest test (that does not work)

First, we can write the test like we would do it with a Java enum:

def "should use enum method like in java"() {
    expect:
        EnumWithInstanceMethod.MINUS.sign() == '-'
}

The test fails:

Condition failed with Exception:

EnumWithInstanceMethod.MINUS.sign() == '-'
                             |
                             groovy.lang.MissingMethodException: No signature of method: static com.github.alien11689.testingkotlinwithspock.EnumWithInstanceMethod$MINUS.sign() is applicable for argument types: () values: []
                             Possible solutions: sign(), sign(), is(java.lang.Object), find(), with(groovy.lang.Closure), find(groovy.lang.Closure)


    at com.github.alien11689.testingkotlinwithspock.EnumWithInstanceMethodTest.should use enum method like in java(EnumWithInstanceMethodTest.groovy:11)
Caused by: groovy.lang.MissingMethodException: No signature of method: static com.github.alien11689.testingkotlinwithspock.EnumWithInstanceMethod$MINUS.sign() is applicable for argument types: () values: []
Possible solutions: sign(), sign(), is(java.lang.Object), find(), with(groovy.lang.Closure), find(groovy.lang.Closure)
    ... 1 more

Interesting… Why is Groovy telling us that we are trying to call a static method? Maybe we are not using the enum instance but something else?. Let’s create a test where we pass the enum instance to method:

static String consume(EnumWithInstanceMethod e) {
    return e.sign()
}
def "should pass enum as parameter"() {
    expect: consume(EnumWithInstanceMethod.MINUS) == '-'
}

Error message:

Condition failed with Exception:

consume(EnumWithInstanceMethod.MINUS) == '-'
|
groovy.lang.MissingMethodException: No signature of method: static com.github.alien11689.testingkotlinwithspock.EnumWithInstanceMethodTest.consume() is applicable for argument types: (java.lang.Class) values: [class com.github.alien11689.testingkotlinwithspock.EnumWithInstanceMethod$MINUS]
Possible solutions: consume(com.github.alien11689.testingkotlinwithspock.EnumWithInstanceMethod)


    at com.github.alien11689.testingkotlinwithspock.EnumWithInstanceMethodTest.should pass enum as parameter(EnumWithInstanceMethodTest.groovy:29)
Caused by: groovy.lang.MissingMethodException: No signature of method: static com.github.alien11689.testingkotlinwithspock.EnumWithInstanceMethodTest.consume() is applicable for argument types: (java.lang.Class) values: [class com.github.alien11689.testingkotlinwithspock.EnumWithInstanceMethod$MINUS]
Possible solutions: consume(com.github.alien11689.testingkotlinwithspock.EnumWithInstanceMethod)
    ... 1 more

Now we see that we passed the class com.github.alien11689.testingkotlinwithspock.EnumWithInstanceMethod$MINUS, not the enum instance.

But it works in Java…

Analogous code in JUnit works perfectly and the test passes:

@Test
public void shouldReturnSign() {
    assertEquals("-", EnumWithInstanceMethod.MINUS.sign());
}

Java can access Kotlin’s instance method without problems, so maybe something is wrong with Groovy…

But the Java enum with instance method, e. g.

public enum EnumWithInstanceMethodInJava {
    PLUS {
        public String sign() {
            return "+";
        }
    },
    MINUS {
        public String sign() {
            return "-";
        }
    };

    public abstract String sign();
}

works correctly in the Spock test:

def "should use enum method"() {
    expect:
        EnumWithInstanceMethodInJava.MINUS.sign() == '-'
}

What’s the difference?

We can spot the difference just by looking at the compiled classes:

$ tree build/classes/main/
build/classes/main/
└── com
    └── github
        └── alien11689
            └── testingkotlinwithspock
                ├── AdultValidator.class
                ├── EnumWithInstanceMethod.class
                ├── EnumWithInstanceMethodInJava$1.class
                ├── EnumWithInstanceMethodInJava$2.class
                ├── EnumWithInstanceMethodInJava.class
                ├── EnumWithInstanceMethod$MINUS.class
                ├── EnumWithInstanceMethod$PLUS.class
                ├── Error.class
                ├── Ok.class
                ├── ValidationStatus.class
                └── Validator.class

Java generates anonymous classes (EnumWithInstanceMethodInJava$1 and EnumWithInstanceMethodInJava$2) for the enum instances, but Kotlin names those classes after the enum instances names (EnumWithInstanceMethod$MINUS and EnumWithInstanceMethod$PLUS).

How does it tie into the problem with Groovy? Groovy does not need the .class when accessing class in code, so when we try to access EnumWithInstanceMethod.MINUS, Groovy converts it to EnumWithInstanceMethod.MINUS.class, not the instance of the enum. The same problem does not occur in Java code since there is no EnumWithInstanceMethodInJava$MINUS class.

Solution

Knowing the difference, we can solve the problem of accessing Kotlin’s enum instance in our Groovy code.

The first solution is accessing the enum instance with valueOf method:

def "should use enum method working"() {
    expect:
        EnumWithInstanceMethod.valueOf('MINUS').sign() == '-'
}

 

The second way is to tell Groovy explicitly that we want to access the static field which is the instance of enum:

def "should use enum method"() {
    expect:
        EnumWithInstanceMethod.@MINUS.sign() == '-'
}

You can choose either solution depending on style of your code and your preferences.

Show me the code

Code is available here.

You May Also Like

How to use mocks in controller tests

Even since I started to write tests for my Grails application I couldn't find many articles on using mocks. Everyone is talking about tests and TDD but if you search for it there isn't many articles.

Today I want to share with you a test with mocks for a simple and complete scenario. I have a simple application that can fetch Twitter tweets and present it to user. I use REST service and I use GET to fetch tweets by id like this: http://api.twitter.com/1/statuses/show/236024636775735296.json. You can copy and paste it into your browser to see a result.

My application uses Grails 2.1 with spock-0.6 for tests. I have TwitterReaderService that fetches tweets by id, then I parse a response into my Tweet class.


class TwitterReaderService {
Tweet readTweet(String id) throws TwitterError {
try {
String jsonBody = callTwitter(id)
Tweet parsedTweet = parseBody(jsonBody)
return parsedTweet
} catch (Throwable t) {
throw new TwitterError(t)
}
}

private String callTwitter(String id) {
// TODO: implementation
}

private Tweet parseBody(String jsonBody) {
// TODO: implementation
}
}

class Tweet {
String id
String userId
String username
String text
Date createdAt
}

class TwitterError extends RuntimeException {}

TwitterController plays main part here. Users call show action along with id of a tweet. This action is my subject under test. I've implemented some basic functionality. It's easier to focus on it while writing tests.


class TwitterController {
def twitterReaderService

def index() {
}

def show() {
Tweet tweet = twitterReaderService.readTweet(params.id)
if (tweet == null) {
flash.message = 'Tweet not found'
redirect(action: 'index')
return
}

[tweet: tweet]
}
}

Let's start writing a test from scratch. Most important thing here is that I use mock for my TwitterReaderService. I do not construct new TwitterReaderService(), because in this test I test only TwitterController. I am not interested in injected service. I know how this service is supposed to work and I am not interested in internals. So before every test I inject a twitterReaderServiceMock into controller:


import grails.test.mixin.TestFor
import spock.lang.Specification

@TestFor(TwitterController)
class TwitterControllerSpec extends Specification {
TwitterReaderService twitterReaderServiceMock = Mock(TwitterReaderService)

def setup() {
controller.twitterReaderService = twitterReaderServiceMock
}
}

Now it's time to think what scenarios I need to test. This line from TwitterReaderService is the most important:


Tweet readTweet(String id) throws TwitterError

You must think of this method like a black box right now. You know nothing of internals from controller's point of view. You're only interested what can be returned for you:

  • a TwitterError can be thrown
  • null can be returned
  • Tweet instance can be returned

This list is your test blueprint. Now answer a simple question for each element: "What do I want my controller to do in this situation?" and you have plan test:

  • show action should redirect to index if TwitterError is thrown and inform about error
  • show action should redirect to index and inform if tweet is not found
  • show action should show found tweet

That was easy and straightforward! And now is the best part: we use twitterReaderServiceMock to mock each of these three scenarios!

In Spock there is a good documentation about interaction with mocks. You declare what methods are called, how many times, what parameters are given and what should be returned. Remember a black box? Mock is your black box with detailed instruction, e.g.: I expect you that if receive exactly one call to readTweet with parameter '1' then you should throw me a TwitterError. Rephrase this sentence out loud and look at this:


1 * twitterReaderServiceMock.readTweet('1') >> { throw new TwitterError() }

This is a valid interaction definition on mock! It's that easy! Here is a complete test that fails for now:


import grails.test.mixin.TestFor
import spock.lang.Specification

@TestFor(TwitterController)
class TwitterControllerSpec extends Specification {
TwitterReaderService twitterReaderServiceMock = Mock(TwitterReaderService)

def setup() {
controller.twitterReaderService = twitterReaderServiceMock
}

def "show should redirect to index if TwitterError is thrown"() {
given:
controller.params.id = '1'
when:
controller.show()
then:
1 * twitterReaderServiceMock.readTweet('1') >> { throw new TwitterError() }
0 * _._
flash.message == 'There was an error on fetching your tweet'
response.redirectUrl == '/twitter/index'
}
}

| Failure: show should redirect to index if TwitterError is thrown(pl.refaktor.twitter.TwitterControllerSpec)
| pl.refaktor.twitter.TwitterError
at pl.refaktor.twitter.TwitterControllerSpec.show should redirect to index if TwitterError is thrown_closure1(TwitterControllerSpec.groovy:29)

You may notice 0 * _._ notation. It says: I don't want any other mocks or any other methods called. Fail this test if something is called! It's a good practice to ensure that there are no more interactions than you want.

Ok, now I need to implement controller logic to handle TwitterError.


class TwitterController {

def twitterReaderService

def index() {
}

def show() {
Tweet tweet

try {
tweet = twitterReaderService.readTweet(params.id)
} catch (TwitterError e) {
log.error(e)
flash.message = 'There was an error on fetching your tweet'
redirect(action: 'index')
return
}

[tweet: tweet]
}
}

My tests passes! We have two scenarios left. Rule stays the same: TwitterReaderService returns something and we test against it. So this line is the heart of each test, change only returned values after >>:


1 * twitterReaderServiceMock.readTweet('1') >> { throw new TwitterError() }

Here is a complete test for three scenarios and controller that passes it.


import grails.test.mixin.TestFor
import spock.lang.Specification

@TestFor(TwitterController)
class TwitterControllerSpec extends Specification {

TwitterReaderService twitterReaderServiceMock = Mock(TwitterReaderService)

def setup() {
controller.twitterReaderService = twitterReaderServiceMock
}

def "show should redirect to index if TwitterError is thrown"() {
given:
controller.params.id = '1'
when:
controller.show()
then:
1 * twitterReaderServiceMock.readTweet('1') >> { throw new TwitterError() }
0 * _._
flash.message == 'There was an error on fetching your tweet'
response.redirectUrl == '/twitter/index'
}

def "show should inform about not found tweet"() {
given:
controller.params.id = '1'
when:
controller.show()
then:
1 * twitterReaderServiceMock.readTweet('1') >> null
0 * _._
flash.message == 'Tweet not found'
response.redirectUrl == '/twitter/index'
}


def "show should show found tweet"() {
given:
controller.params.id = '1'
when:
controller.show()
then:
1 * twitterReaderServiceMock.readTweet('1') >> new Tweet()
0 * _._
flash.message == null
response.status == 200
}
}

class TwitterController {

def twitterReaderService

def index() {
}

def show() {
Tweet tweet

try {
tweet = twitterReaderService.readTweet(params.id)
} catch (TwitterError e) {
log.error(e)
flash.message = 'There was an error on fetching your tweet'
redirect(action: 'index')
return
}

if (tweet == null) {
flash.message = 'Tweet not found'
redirect(action: 'index')
return
}

[tweet: tweet]
}
}

The most important thing here is that we've tested controller-service interaction without logic implementation in service! That's why mock technique is so useful. It decouples your dependencies and let you focus on exactly one subject under test. Happy testing!