From a3388622287e218beddfa14a47ed677d4307b36b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Fabio Bas Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 17:55:51 +0100 Subject: Removed simpletest and moved all tests in the unit tree Tests are executed now, but a lot of them need fixing. --- .../docs/en/mock_objects_documentation.html | 727 --------------------- 1 file changed, 727 deletions(-) delete mode 100755 tests/test_tools/simpletest/docs/en/mock_objects_documentation.html (limited to 'tests/test_tools/simpletest/docs/en/mock_objects_documentation.html') diff --git a/tests/test_tools/simpletest/docs/en/mock_objects_documentation.html b/tests/test_tools/simpletest/docs/en/mock_objects_documentation.html deleted file mode 100755 index eb32c619..00000000 --- a/tests/test_tools/simpletest/docs/en/mock_objects_documentation.html +++ /dev/null @@ -1,727 +0,0 @@ - - - -SimpleTest for PHP mock objects documentation - - - - -

Mock objects documentation

-
-

- -

What are mock objects?

- -

-

- Mock objects have two roles during a test case: actor and critic. -

-

- The actor behaviour is to simulate objects that are difficult to - set up or time consuming to set up for a test. - The classic example is a database connection. - Setting up a test database at the start of each test would slow - testing to a crawl and would require the installation of the - database engine and test data on the test machine. - If we can simulate the connection and return data of our - choosing we not only win on the pragmatics of testing, but can - also feed our code spurious data to see how it responds. - We can simulate databases being down or other extremes - without having to create a broken database for real. - In other words, we get greater control of the test environment. -

-

- If mock objects only behaved as actors they would simply be - known as server stubs. - This was originally a pattern named by Robert Binder (Testing - object-oriented systems: models, patterns, and tools, - Addison-Wesley) in 1999. -

-

- A server stub is a simulation of an object or component. - It should exactly replace a component in a system for test - or prototyping purposes, but remain lightweight. - This allows tests to run more quickly, or if the simulated - class has not been written, to run at all. -

-

- However, the mock objects not only play a part (by supplying chosen - return values on demand) they are also sensitive to the - messages sent to them (via expectations). - By setting expected parameters for a method call they act - as a guard that the calls upon them are made correctly. - If expectations are not met they save us the effort of - writing a failed test assertion by performing that duty on our - behalf. -

-

- In the case of an imaginary database connection they can - test that the query, say SQL, was correctly formed by - the object that is using the connection. - Set them up with fairly tight expectations and you will - hardly need manual assertions at all. -

- -

- -

Creating mock objects

- -

-

- In the same way that we create server stubs, all we need is an - existing class, say a database connection that looks like this... -

-class DatabaseConnection {
-    function DatabaseConnection() {
-    }
-    
-    function query() {
-    }
-    
-    function selectQuery() {
-    }
-}
-
- The class does not need to have been implemented yet. - To create a mock version of the class we need to include the - mock object library and run the generator... -
-require_once('simpletest/unit_tester.php');
-require_once('simpletest/mock_objects.php');
-require_once('database_connection.php');
-
-Mock::generate('DatabaseConnection');
-
- This generates a clone class called - MockDatabaseConnection. - We can now create instances of the new class within - our test case... -
-require_once('simpletest/unit_tester.php');
-require_once('simpletest/mock_objects.php');
-require_once('database_connection.php');
-
-Mock::generate('DatabaseConnection');
-
-class MyTestCase extends UnitTestCase {
-    
-    function testSomething() {
-        $connection = &new MockDatabaseConnection();
-    }
-}
-
- Unlike the generated stubs the mock constructor needs a reference - to the test case so that it can dispatch passes and failures while - checking its expectations. - This means that mock objects can only be used within test cases. - Despite this their extra power means that stubs are hardly ever used - if mocks are available. -

-

- -

Mocks as actors

- -

-

- The mock version of a class has all the methods of the original, - so that operations like - $connection->query() are still - legal. - The return value will be null, - but we can change that with... -

-$connection->setReturnValue('query', 37)
-
- Now every time we call - $connection->query() we get - the result of 37. - We can set the return value to anything, say a hash of - imaginary database results or a list of persistent objects. - Parameters are irrelevant here, we always get the same - values back each time once they have been set up this way. - That may not sound like a convincing replica of a - database connection, but for the half a dozen lines of - a test method it is usually all you need. -

-

- We can also add extra methods to the mock when generating it - and choose our own class name... -

-Mock::generate('DatabaseConnection', 'MyMockDatabaseConnection', array('setOptions'));
-
- Here the mock will behave as if the setOptions() - existed in the original class. - This is handy if a class has used the PHP overload() - mechanism to add dynamic methods. - You can create a special mock to simulate this situation. -

-

- Things aren't always that simple though. - One common problem is iterators, where constantly returning - the same value could cause an endless loop in the object - being tested. - For these we need to set up sequences of values. - Let's say we have a simple iterator that looks like this... -

-class Iterator {
-    function Iterator() {
-    }
-    
-    function next() {
-    }
-}
-
- This is about the simplest iterator you could have. - Assuming that this iterator only returns text until it - reaches the end, when it returns false, we can simulate it - with... -
-Mock::generate('Iterator');
-
-class IteratorTest extends UnitTestCase() {
-    
-    function testASequence() {
-        $iterator = &new MockIterator();
-        $iterator->setReturnValue('next', false);
-        $iterator->setReturnValueAt(0, 'next', 'First string');
-        $iterator->setReturnValueAt(1, 'next', 'Second string');
-        ...
-    }
-}
-
- When next() is called on the - mock iterator it will first return "First string", - on the second call "Second string" will be returned - and on any other call false will - be returned. - The sequenced return values take precedence over the constant - return value. - The constant one is a kind of default if you like. -

-

- Another tricky situation is an overloaded - get() operation. - An example of this is an information holder with name/value pairs. - Say we have a configuration class like... -

-class Configuration {
-    function Configuration() {
-    }
-    
-    function getValue($key) {
-    }
-}
-
- This is a classic situation for using mock objects as - actual configuration will vary from machine to machine, - hardly helping the reliability of our tests if we use it - directly. - The problem though is that all the data comes through the - getValue() method and yet - we want different results for different keys. - Luckily the mocks have a filter system... -
-$config = &new MockConfiguration();
-$config->setReturnValue('getValue', 'primary', array('db_host'));
-$config->setReturnValue('getValue', 'admin', array('db_user'));
-$config->setReturnValue('getValue', 'secret', array('db_password'));
-
- The extra parameter is a list of arguments to attempt - to match. - In this case we are trying to match only one argument which - is the look up key. - Now when the mock object has the - getValue() method invoked - like this... -
-$config->getValue('db_user')
-
- ...it will return "admin". - It finds this by attempting to match the calling arguments - to its list of returns one after another until - a complete match is found. -

-

- You can set a default argument argument like so... -

-
-$config->setReturnValue('getValue', false, array('*'));
-
- This is not the same as setting the return value without - any argument requirements like this... -
-
-$config->setReturnValue('getValue', false);
-
- In the first case it will accept any single argument, - but exactly one is required. - In the second case any number of arguments will do and - it acts as a catchall after all other matches. - Note that if we add further single parameter options after - the wildcard in the first case, they will be ignored as the wildcard - will match first. - With complex parameter lists the ordering could be important - or else desired matches could be masked by earlier wildcard - ones. - Declare the most specific matches first if you are not sure. -

-

- There are times when you want a specific object to be - dished out by the mock rather than a copy. - The PHP4 copy semantics force us to use a different method - for this. - You might be simulating a container for example... -

-class Thing {
-}
-
-class Vector {
-    function Vector() {
-    }
-    
-    function get($index) {
-    }
-}
-
- In this case you can set a reference into the mock's - return list... -
-$thing = &new Thing();
-$vector = &new MockVector();
-$vector->setReturnReference('get', $thing, array(12));
-
- With this arrangement you know that every time - $vector->get(12) is - called it will return the same - $thing each time. - This is compatible with PHP5 as well. -

-

- These three factors, timing, parameters and whether to copy, - can be combined orthogonally. - For example... -

-$complex = &new MockComplexThing();
-$stuff = &new Stuff();
-$complex->setReturnReferenceAt(3, 'get', $stuff, array('*', 1));
-
- This will return the $stuff only on the third - call and only if two parameters were set the second of - which must be the integer 1. - That should cover most simple prototyping situations. -

-

- A final tricky case is one object creating another, known - as a factory pattern. - Suppose that on a successful query to our imaginary - database, a result set is returned as an iterator with - each call to next() giving - one row until false. - This sounds like a simulation nightmare, but in fact it can all - be mocked using the mechanics above. -

-

- Here's how... -

-Mock::generate('DatabaseConnection');
-Mock::generate('ResultIterator');
-
-class DatabaseTest extends UnitTestCase {
-    
-    function testUserFinder() {
-        $result = &new MockResultIterator();
-        $result->setReturnValue('next', false);
-        $result->setReturnValueAt(0, 'next', array(1, 'tom'));
-        $result->setReturnValueAt(1, 'next', array(3, 'dick'));
-        $result->setReturnValueAt(2, 'next', array(6, 'harry'));
-        
-        $connection = &new MockDatabaseConnection();
-        $connection->setReturnValue('query', false);
-        $connection->setReturnReference(
-                'query',
-                $result,
-                array('select id, name from users'));
-                
-        $finder = &new UserFinder($connection);
-        $this->assertIdentical(
-                $finder->findNames(),
-                array('tom', 'dick', 'harry'));
-    }
-}
-
- Now only if our - $connection is called with the correct - query() will the - $result be returned that is - itself exhausted after the third call to next(). - This should be enough - information for our UserFinder class, - the class actually - being tested here, to come up with goods. - A very precise test and not a real database in sight. -

- -

- -

Mocks as critics

- -

-

- Although the server stubs approach insulates your tests from - real world disruption, it is only half the benefit. - You can have the class under test receiving the required - messages, but is your new class sending correct ones? - Testing this can get messy without a mock objects library. -

-

- By way of example, suppose we have a - SessionPool class that we - want to add logging to. - Rather than grow the original class into something more - complicated, we want to add this behaviour with a decorator (GOF). - The SessionPool code currently looks - like this... -

-class SessionPool {
-    function SessionPool() {
-        ...
-    }
-    
-    function &findSession($cookie) {
-        ...
-    }
-    ...
-}
-
-class Session {
-    ...
-}
-</php>
-                While our logging code looks like this...
-<php>
-class Log {
-    function Log() {
-        ...
-    }
-    
-    function message() {
-        ...
-    }
-}
-
-class LoggingSessionPool {
-    function LoggingSessionPool(&$session_pool, &$log) {
-        ...
-    }
-    
-    function &findSession(\$cookie) {
-        ...
-    }
-    ...
-}
-
- Out of all of this, the only class we want to test here - is the LoggingSessionPool. - In particular we would like to check that the - findSession() method is - called with the correct session ID in the cookie and that - it sent the message "Starting session $cookie" - to the logger. -

-

- Despite the fact that we are testing only a few lines of - production code, here is what we would have to do in a - conventional test case: -

    -
  1. Create a log object.
  2. -
  3. Set a directory to place the log file.
  4. -
  5. Set the directory permissions so we can write the log.
  6. -
  7. Create a SessionPool object.
  8. -
  9. Hand start a session, which probably does lot's of things.
  10. -
  11. Invoke findSession().
  12. -
  13. Read the new Session ID (hope there is an accessor!).
  14. -
  15. Raise a test assertion to confirm that the ID matches the cookie.
  16. -
  17. Read the last line of the log file.
  18. -
  19. Pattern match out the extra logging timestamps, etc.
  20. -
  21. Assert that the session message is contained in the text.
  22. -
- It is hardly surprising that developers hate writing tests - when they are this much drudgery. - To make things worse, every time the logging format changes or - the method of creating new sessions changes, we have to rewrite - parts of this test even though this test does not officially - test those parts of the system. - We are creating headaches for the writers of these other classes. -

-

- Instead, here is the complete test method using mock object magic... -

-Mock::generate('Session');
-Mock::generate('SessionPool');
-Mock::generate('Log');
-
-class LoggingSessionPoolTest extends UnitTestCase {
-    ...
-    function testFindSessionLogging() {
-        $session = &new MockSession();
-        $pool = &new MockSessionPool();
-        $pool->setReturnReference('findSession', $session);
-        $pool->expectOnce('findSession', array('abc'));
-        
-        $log = &new MockLog();
-        $log->expectOnce('message', array('Starting session abc'));
-        
-        $logging_pool = &new LoggingSessionPool($pool, $log);
-        $this->assertReference($logging_pool->findSession('abc'), $session);
-    }
-}
-
- We start by creating a dummy session. - We don't have to be too fussy about this as the check - for which session we want is done elsewhere. - We only need to check that it was the same one that came - from the session pool. -

-

- findSession() is a factory - method the simulation of which is described above. - The point of departure comes with the first - expectOnce() call. - This line states that whenever - findSession() is invoked on the - mock, it will test the incoming arguments. - If it receives the single argument of a string "abc" - then a test pass is sent to the unit tester, otherwise a fail is - generated. - This was the part where we checked that the right session was asked for. - The argument list follows the same format as the one for setting - return values. - You can have wildcards and sequences and the order of - evaluation is the same. -

-

- We use the same pattern to set up the mock logger. - We tell it that it should have - message() invoked - once only with the argument "Starting session abc". - By testing the calling arguments, rather than the logger output, - we insulate the test from any display changes in the logger. -

-

- We start to run our tests when we create the new - LoggingSessionPool and feed - it our preset mock objects. - Everything is now under our control. -

-

- This is still quite a bit of test code, but the code is very - strict. - If it still seems rather daunting there is a lot less of it - than if we tried this without mocks and this particular test, - interactions rather than output, is always more work to set - up. - More often you will be testing more complex situations without - needing this level or precision. - Also some of this can be refactored into a test case - setUp() method. -

-

- Here is the full list of expectations you can set on a mock object - in SimpleTest... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ExpectationNeeds tally()
expect($method, $args)No
expectAt($timing, $method, $args)No
expectCallCount($method, $count)Yes
expectMaximumCallCount($method, $count)No
expectMinimumCallCount($method, $count)Yes
expectNever($method)No
expectOnce($method, $args)Yes
expectAtLeastOnce($method, $args)Yes
- Where the parameters are... -

-
$method
-
The method name, as a string, to apply the condition to.
-
$args
-
- The arguments as a list. Wildcards can be included in the same - manner as for setReturn(). - This argument is optional for expectOnce() - and expectAtLeastOnce(). -
-
$timing
-
- The only point in time to test the condition. - The first call starts at zero. -
-
$count
-
The number of calls expected.
-
- The method expectMaximumCallCount() - is slightly different in that it will only ever generate a failure. - It is silent if the limit is never reached. -

-

- Like the assertions within test cases, all of the expectations - can take a message override as an extra parameter. - Also the original failure message can be embedded in the output - as "%s". -

- -

- -

Other approaches

- -

-

- There are three approaches to creating mocks including the one - that SimpleTest employs. - Coding them by hand using a base class, generating them to - a file and dynamically generating them on the fly. -

-

- Mock objects generated with SimpleTest - are dynamic. - They are created at run time in memory, using - eval(), rather than written - out to a file. - This makes the mocks easy to create, a one liner, - especially compared with hand - crafting them in a parallel class hierarchy. - The problem is that the behaviour is usually set up in the tests - themselves. - If the original objects change the mock versions - that the tests rely on can get out of sync. - This can happen with the parallel hierarchy approach as well, - but is far more quickly detected. -

-

- The solution, of course, is to add some real integration - tests. - You don't need very many and the convenience gained - from the mocks more than outweighs the small amount of - extra testing. - You cannot trust code that was only tested with mocks. -

-

- If you are still determined to build static libraries of mocks - because you want to simulate very specific behaviour, you can - achieve the same effect using the SimpleTest class generator. - In your library file, say mocks/connection.php for a - database connection, create a mock and inherit to override - special methods or add presets... -

-<?php
-    require_once('simpletest/mock_objects.php');
-    require_once('../classes/connection.php');
-
-    Mock::generate('Connection', 'BasicMockConnection');
-    class MockConnection extends BasicMockConnection {
-        function MockConnection() {
-            $this->BasicMockConnection();
-            $this->setReturn('query', false);
-        }
-    }
-?>
-
- The generate call tells the class generator to create - a class called BasicMockConnection - rather than the usual MockConnection. - We then inherit from this to get our version of - MockConnection. - By intercepting in this way we can add behaviour, here setting - the default value of query() to be false. - By using the default name we make sure that the mock class - generator will not recreate a different one when invoked elsewhere in the - tests. - It never creates a class if it already exists. - As long as the above file is included first then all tests - that generated MockConnection should - now be using our one instead. - If we don't get the order right and the mock library - creates one first then the class creation will simply fail. -

-

- Use this trick if you find you have a lot of common mock behaviour - or you are getting frequent integration problems at later - stages of testing. -

- -
- - - -- cgit v1.2.3