Enable Sequential Mocks #18
Conversation
- Enabled fluent interface for calling `isCalledForTheNthTime` to define different mocked results for repeated method calls - Added examples and tests in `AccountDomainTest` - Retained backwards compatibility with existing implementations - Cleaned up magic strings - Added to .gitIgnore example: ``` mockService.when(mockedMethodName).isCalledForTheNthTime(1).thenReturn(true); mockService.when(mockedMethodName).isCalledForTheNthTime(2).thenReturn(false); ```
mitchspano
force-pushed
the
feature/sequentialMocks
branch
from
3695e01 to
5e09282
Compare
| @@ -175,9 +183,18 @@ public with sharing class UniversalMocker implements System.StubProvider { | |||
| ) { | |||
| String keyInUse = this.determineKeyToUseForCurrentStubbedMethod(stubbedMethodName, listOfParamTypes); | |||
| this.incrementCallCount(keyInUse); | |||
| Integer currentCallCount = this.callCountsMap.get(keyInUse); | |||
| Integer countToUse = this.setResultsForCallingNTimes ? currentCallCount : 1; | |||
| if (this.setResultsForCallingNTimes) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mitchspano What's the reason behind this check for each stubbed method call? Feels like an avoidable performance hit
| } | ||
|
|
||
| @IsTest | ||
| private static void skipping_indicies_when_setting_is_called_for_the_nth_time_should_cause_invalid_operation() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mitchspano This is an interesting design choice. I'm leaning more towards using the indices as a marker for this call and anything after it till the next explicit index . For eg: isCalledForTheNthTime(1) followed by isCalledForTheNthTime(3) would mean, use the first value for calls 1 and 2 and use the second value for the 3rd call and anything after that. Feels more flexible and also good for when you have an unknown/variable number of method calls and you want to use a different value for the first x calls and then a common value for all calls after that. Curious to hear your thoughts on this approach
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like the approach! Similar to a different comment, I believe that the method name might need to be updated if we switch the behavior. Perhaps something like isCalledNOrMoreTimes would make this a little clearer to the reader. We need to think about a naming convention which makes sense for "n or more times" and 0 based indexing 🤔.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great point. I think isCalledAfterNthTime is a bit clearer. It also hints at 0 based indexing.
| @@ -228,13 +245,24 @@ public with sharing class UniversalMocker implements System.StubProvider { | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| private void isCalledForTheNthTime(Integer n) { | |||
| if (n == null || n < 1) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mitchspano I like the fact that this method uses one-based indexing. However, as a result of my, arguably poor, earlier design choice of using zero-based indexing for andInvocationNumber method for retrieving the method parameters, I'd prefer keeping this consistent and use zero-based indexing. I know its confusing, but I'd hate to change the indexing for andInvocationNumber at this point and break backwards compatibility :(
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ack. I am not certain that the method name isCalledForTheNthTime makes sense for the reader if we switched to 0 based indexing. We might need to change the verbiage a little bit.
| Test.stopTest(); | ||
|
|
||
| //verify | ||
| System.assertEquals(null, myException, 'An exception should not be thrown because both of the Database.SaveResult were successful'); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would be useful to also print out what the exception was and maybe the stacktracestring to help with debugging efforts.
|
Addressed in #23 |
isCalledForTheNthTimeto define different mocked results for repeated method callsAccountDomainTestexample: