Properly Testing a simple class with Private Methods - php

Description:
I have a simple class that creates a symlink to a directory of uploaded files that are only available to registered members. It uses the current users session id in order to generate the random directory for the user. Once the user logs out, the symlink is removed. I would like to unit test the functionality of the class.
Question:
How do I go about properly unit testing this class since most functions are private, and I don't see any reason to make them public?
Here is the code for the PHP class:
<?php
namespace Test\BackEnd\MemberBundle\Library;
use Symfony\Component\HttpFoundation\Session\SessionInterface;
use Symfony\Component\HttpKernel\KernelInterface;
class DirectoryProtector
{
/** #var SessionInterface $_session */
private $_session;
/** #var ContainerInterface $_kernel */
private $_kernel;
/**
* #param SessionInterface $session
* #param KernelInterface $kernel
*/
public function __construct( SessionInterface $session, KernelInterface $kernel )
{
$this->_session = $session;
$this->_kernel = $kernel;
}
/**
* #param bool|false $protect
* Public method to symlink directories
*/
public function protectDirectory($protect = FALSE)
{
if ($protect) {
if ( ! $this->doesDirectoryExists())
symlink($this->getAppDir() . '/uploads', $this->getViewableSessionDirectory());
} else {
if ($this->doesDirectoryExists())
unlink($this->getViewableSessionDirectory());
}
}
/**
* #return bool
* Check to see if viewable session directory exists or not
*/
private function doesDirectoryExists()
{
if (file_exists($this->getViewableSessionDirectory()))
return TRUE;
return FALSE;
}
/**
* #return string
* Get viewable session full directory path
*/
private function getViewableSessionDirectory()
{
return $this->getAppDir() . '/../web/files/' . $this->getSessionId();
}
/**
* #return string
* Return app root directory
*/
private function getAppDir()
{
return $this->_kernel->getRootDir();
}
/**
* #return string
* Return session id
*/
private function getSessionId()
{
return $this->_session->getId();
}
}
Here is the code for the current test class:
<?php
namespace Test\BackEnd\MemberBundle\Tests\Library;
use Test\BackEnd\MemberBundle\Library\DirectoryProtector;
class DirectoryProtectorTest extends \PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase
{
public function testProtectDirectory()
{
//$this->markTestIncomplete("WIP on protect directory.");
$request = $this->getMockBuilder('Symfony\Component\HttpFoundation\Session\SessionInterface')
->getMock();
$container = $this->getMockBuilder('Symfony\Component\HttpKernel\KernelInterface')
->getMock();
/** #var DirectoryProtector $dp */
$dp = $this->getMockBuilder('Test\BackEnd\MemberBundle\Library\DirectoryProtector')
->setConstructorArgs(array($request, $container))
->setMethods(array(
'getViewableSessionDirectory',
'getAppDir',
'getSessionId'
))
->getMock();
$dp->expects($this->once())
->method('doesDirectoryExists')
->will($this->returnValue(TRUE));
$dp->protectDirectory(TRUE);
}
}

From https://phpunit.de/manual/current/en/test-doubles.html
Limitation: final, private, and static methods
Please note that final, private and static methods cannot be stubbed or mocked. They are ignored by PHPUnit's test double functionality and retain their original behavior.
Is not a good practice to unit test private or protected methods. You should test the public API. Private methods are supposed to be tested indirectly through the API. That said, you can make the method public with reflection:
$instance = new DirectoryProtector(...);
$ref = new \ReflectionClass('DirectoryProtector');
$method = $ref->getMethod('doesDirectoryExists');
$method->setAccessible(true);
$this->assertTrue($method->invoke($instance));

I think your approach is incorrect. You shouldn't mock method, but objects that are passed by injection in constructor.
For the SessionInterface you can pass MockArraySessionStorage. For ContainerInterface I don't know which class you are using, so I add some demo example. Test case:
public function testProtectDirectory()
{
$session = new MockArraySessionStorage();
$session->setId('123123');
$kernel = \Ouzo\Tests\Mock\Mock::create('ContainerInterface');
\Ouzo\Tests\Mock\Mock::when($kernel)->getRootDir()->thenReturn('/root_dir');
$directoryProtector = new DirectoryProtector($session, $kernel);
$directoryProtector->protectDirectory(true);
//asserts
}
and your methods will be returning:
getViewableSessionDirectory -> /root_dir/../web/files/123123
getAppDir -> /root_dir
And remember changing methods accessible is always bad idea.
PS. For mocking I use utils form Ouzo framework. Of course you can use other mocking framework.

Related

TYPO3 v9.5.11 Extbase: Inject ServiceObject generated by a ContainerClass into Repository

I am trying to inject an service object into my Repository. I have created different Service Classes under the directory Classes/Services. There is also one class that I created called ContainerService, which creates and instantiate one ServiceObject for each Service Class.
ContainerService Class:
namespace VendorName\MyExt\Service;
use VendorName\MyExt\Service\RestClientService;
class ContainerService {
private $restClient;
private $otherService;
/**
* #return RestClientService
*/
public function getRestClient() {
$objectManager = GeneralUtility::makeInstance(\TYPO3\CMS\Extbase\Object\ObjectManager::class);
if ($this->restClient === null) {
$this->restClient = $objectManager->get(RestClientService::class);
}
return $this->restClient;
}
...
As I said, I create my ServiceObjects in the ContainerService Class.
Now I want to inject the ContainerService into my Repository and use it.
MyRepository Class:
namespace VendorName\MyExt\Domain\Repository;
use VendorName\MyExt\Service\ContainerService;
class MyRepository extends Repository
{
/**
* #var ContainerService
*/
public $containerService;
/**
* inject the ContainerService
*
* #param ContainerService $containerService
* #return void
*/
public function injectContainerService(ContainerService $containerService) {
$this->containerService = $containerService;
}
// Use Objects from The ContainerService
public function findAddress($addressId) {
$url = 'Person/getAddressbyId/'
$someData = $this->containerService->getRestClient()->sendRequest($url)
return $someData;
}
In MyController I recieve the $someData from my findAddress function and do some work with it.
But when I call my Page, I get following ErrorMessage:
(1/2) #1278450972 TYPO3\CMS\Extbase\Reflection\Exception\UnknownClassException
Class ContainerService does not exist. Reflection failed.
Already tried to reload all Caches and dumping the Autoload didn't help either.
Didn't install TYPO3 with composer.
I appreciate any advice or help! Thanks!
Actually found the Issue.
In MyRepository Class there was a Problem with the Annotations and the TypeHint:
namespace VendorName\MyExt\Domain\Repository;
use VendorName\MyExt\Service\ContainerService;
class MyRepository extends Repository
{
/**
*** #var \VendorName\MyExt\Service\ContainerService**
*/
public $containerService;
/**
* inject the ContainerService
*
* #param \VendorName\MyExt\Service\ContainerService $containerService
* #return void
*/
public function injectContainerService(\VendorName\MyExt\Service\ContainerService $containerService) {
$this->containerService = $containerService;
}
// Use Objects from The ContainerService
public function findAddress($addressId) {
$url = 'Person/getAddressbyId/'
$someData = $this->containerService->getRestClient()->sendRequest($url)
return $someData;
}
Now it works.

UnitTest object mocking or real object

I had a discussion with my Team Lead, regarding UnitTest, the question was,
In UnitTest do we use Object Mocking or use the Real Object?
I was supporting the Object Mocking concept, as we should only input/output data from Objects.
At the end we agreed to use Real object instead of Mocking so the following was my Test
<?php
namespace App\Services\Checkout\Module\PaymentMethodRules;
use App\Library\Payment\Method;
use App\Services\Checkout\Module\PaymentMethodRuleManager;
class AdminRule implements PaymentMethodRule
{
/**
* #var boolean
*/
private $isAdmin;
/**
* #var bool
*/
private $isBankTransferAvailable;
/**
* #param boolean $isAdmin
* #param bool $isBankTransferAvailable
*/
public function __construct($isAdmin, $isBankTransferAvailable)
{
$this->isAdmin = $isAdmin;
$this->isBankTransferAvailable = $isBankTransferAvailable;
}
/**
* #param PaymentMethodRuleManager $paymentMethodRuleManager
*/
public function run(PaymentMethodRuleManager $paymentMethodRuleManager)
{
if ($this->isAdmin) {
$paymentMethodRuleManager->getList()->add([Method::INVOICE]);
}
if ($this->isAdmin && $this->isBankTransferAvailable) {
$paymentMethodRuleManager->getList()->add([Method::BANK_TRANSFER]);
}
}
}
<?php
namespace tests\Services\Checkout\Module;
use App\Library\Payment\Method;
use App\Services\Checkout\Module\PaymentMethodList;
use App\Services\Checkout\Module\PaymentMethodRuleManager;
use App\Services\Checkout\Module\PaymentMethodRules\AdminRule;
class AdminRuleTest extends \PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase
{
const IS_ADMIN = true;
const IS_NOT_ADMIN = false;
const IS_BANK_TRANSFER = true;
const IS_NOT_BANK_TRANSFER = false;
/**
* #test
* #dataProvider runDataProvider
*
* #param bool $isAdmin
* #param bool $isBankTransferAvailable
* #param array $expected
*/
public function runApplies($isAdmin, $isBankTransferAvailable, $expected)
{
$paymentMethodRuleManager = new PaymentMethodRuleManager(
new PaymentMethodList([]),
new PaymentMethodList([])
);
$adminRule = new AdminRule($isAdmin, $isBankTransferAvailable);
$adminRule->run($paymentMethodRuleManager);
$this->assertEquals($expected, $paymentMethodRuleManager->getList()->get());
}
/**
* #return array
*/
public function runDataProvider()
{
return [
[self::IS_ADMIN, self::IS_BANK_TRANSFER, [Method::INVOICE, Method::BANK_TRANSFER]],
[self::IS_ADMIN, self::IS_NOT_BANK_TRANSFER, [Method::INVOICE]],
[self::IS_NOT_ADMIN, self::IS_BANK_TRANSFER, []],
[self::IS_NOT_ADMIN, self::IS_NOT_BANK_TRANSFER, []]
];
}
}
My question is, in Unit Test should is use Real Objects or Object Mocking and why?
Second Question, the given Unit test is right or wrong in terms of Unit testing.
The generic answer to such a generic question is: you prefer to use as much of "real" code as possible when doing unit tests. Real code should be default, mocked code is the exception!
But of course, there are various valid reasons to use mocking:
The "real" code does not work in your test setup.
You want to use your mocking framework also to verify that certain actions took place
Example: the code that you intend to test makes a call to some remote service (maybe a database server). Of course that means that you need some tests that do the end to end testing. But for many tests, it might be much more convenient to not do that remote call; instead you would use mocking here - to avoid the remote database call.
Alternatively, as suggested by John Joseph; you might also start with mocking all/most dependencies; to then gradually replace mocking with real calls. This process can help with staying focused on testing exactly "that part" that you actually want to test (instead of getting lost in figuring why your tests using "real other code" is giving you troubles).
IMHO I think it would be good if the original code could be tested directly without any mocking as this would make it less error-prone, and would avoid the debate that if the mocked object behaves almost the same as the original one, but we are not living in the world of unicorns anymore, and mocking is a necessary evil or it is not? This remains the question.
So I think I can rephrase your question to be when to use dummy, fake, stub, or mock?
Generally, the aforementioned terms are known as Test doubles.
As a start, you can check this answer here
Some of the cases when test doubles might be good:
The object under test/System Under Test (SUT) a lot of dependencies, that are required for initialization purposes, and these dependencies would not affect the test, so these dependencies can be dummy ones.
/**
* #inheritdoc
*/
protected function setUp()
{
$this->servicesManager = new ServicesManager(
$this->getDummyEntity()
// ........
);
}
/**
* #return \PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_MockObject
*/
private function getDummyEntity()
{
return $this->getMockBuilder(Entity\Entity1::class)
->disableOriginalConstructor()
->setMethods([])
->getMock();
}
SUT has an external dependencies such as an Infrastructure/Resource (e.g. web service, database, cash, file …), then it is a good approach to fake that by using in-memory representation, as one of the reasons to do that is to avoid cluttering this Infrastructure/Resource with test data.
/**
* #var ArrayCollection
*/
private $inMemoryRedisDataStore;
/**
* #var DataStoreInterface
*/
private $fakeDataStore;
/**
* #inheritdoc
*/
protected function setUp()
{
$this->inMemoryRedisDataStore = new Collections\ArrayCollection;
$this->fakeDataStore = $this->getFakeRedisDataStore();
$this->sessionHandler = new SessionHanlder($this->fakeDataStore);
}
/**
* #return \PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_MockObject
*/
private function getFakeRedisDataStore()
{
$fakeRedis = $this->getMockBuilder(
Infrastructure\Memory\Redis::class
)
->disableOriginalConstructor()
->setMethods(['set', 'get'])
->getMock();
$inMemoryRedisDataStore = $this->inMemoryRedisDataStore;
$fakeRedis->method('set')
->will(
$this->returnCallback(
function($key, $data) use ($inMemoryRedisDataStore) {
$inMemoryRedisDataStore[$key] = $data;
}
)
);
$fakeRedis->method('get')
->will(
$this->returnCallback(
function($key) use ($inMemoryRedisDataStore) {
return $inMemoryRedisDataStore[$key];
}
)
);
}
When there is a need of asserting the state of SUT, then stubs become handy. Usually, this would be confused with a fake object, and to clear this out, fake objects are helping objects and they should never be asserted.
/**
* Interface Provider\SMSProviderInterface
*/
interface SMSProviderInterface
{
public function send();
public function isSent(): bool;
}
/**
* Class SMSProviderStub
*/
class SMSProviderStub implements Provider\SMSProviderInterface
{
/**
* #var bool
*/
private $isSent;
/**
* #inheritdoc
*/
public function send()
{
$this->isSent = true;
}
/**
* #return bool
*/
public function isSent(): bool
{
return $this->isSent;
}
}
/**
* Class PaymentServiceTest
*/
class PaymentServiceTest extends \PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase
{
/**
* #var Service\PaymentService
*/
private $paymentService;
/**
* #var SMSProviderInterface
*/
private $smsProviderStub;
/**
* #inheritdoc
*/
protected function setUp()
{
$this->smsProviderStub = $this->getSMSProviderStub();
$this->paymentService = new Service\PaymentService(
$this->smsProviderStub
);
}
/**
* Checks if the SMS was sent after payment using stub
* (by checking status).
*
* #param float $amount
* #param bool $expected
*
* #dataProvider sMSAfterPaymentDataProvider
*/
public function testShouldSendSMSAfterPayment(float $amount, bool $expected)
{
$this->paymentService->pay($amount);
$this->assertEquals($expected, $this->smsProviderStub->isSent());
}
/**
* #return array
*/
public function sMSAfterPaymentDataProvider(): array
{
return [
'Should return true' => [
'amount' => 28.99,
'expected' => true,
],
];
}
/**
* #return Provider\SMSProviderInterface
*/
private function getSMSProviderStub(): Provider\SMSProviderInterface
{
return new SMSProviderStub();
}
}
If the behavior of SUT should be checked then mocks most probably will come to the rescue or stubs (Test spy), it can be detected as simple as that most probably no assert statements should be found. for example, the mock can be setup to behave like when it get a call to X method with values a, and b return the value Y or expect a method to be called once or N of times, ..etc.
/**
* Interface Provider\SMSProviderInterface
*/
interface SMSProviderInterface
{
public function send();
}
class PaymentServiceTest extends \PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase
{
/**
* #var Service\PaymentService
*/
private $paymentService;
/**
* #inheritdoc
*/
protected function setUp()
{
$this->paymentService = new Service\PaymentService(
$this->getSMSProviderMock()
);
}
/**
* Checks if the SMS was sent after payment using mock
* (by checking behavior).
*
* #param float $amount
*
* #dataProvider sMSAfterPaymentDataProvider
*/
public function testShouldSendSMSAfterPayment(float $amount)
{
$this->paymentService->pay($amount);
}
/**
* #return array
*/
public function sMSAfterPaymentDataProvider(): array
{
return [
'Should check behavior' => [
'amount' => 28.99,
],
];
}
/**
* #return SMSProviderInterface
*/
private function getSMSProviderMock(): SMSProviderInterface
{
$smsProviderMock = $this->getMockBuilder(Provider\SMSProvider::class)
->disableOriginalConstructor()
->setMethods(['send'])
->getMock();
$smsProviderMock->expects($this->once())
->method('send')
->with($this->anything());
}
}
Corner cases
SUT has a lot of dependencies which are dependent on other things, and to avoid this dependency loop as we are only interested in testing some methods, the whole object can be mocked, but with having the ability to forward the calls to the original methods.
$testDouble = $this->getMockBuilder(Entity\Entity1::class)
->disableOriginalConstructor()
->setMethods(null);
As per Ahmed Kamal's answer, it worked as expected.
I tested the below sample.
Foo.php
<?php
class Foo
{
/**
* Tell Foo class Name
* #param string $name
* #return string
*/
public function tellName(string $name = 'Josh'): string
{
return 'Hi ' . $name;
}
}
FooTest.php
<?php
include('Foo.php');
use PHPUnit\Framework\TestCase;
class FooTest extends TestCase
{
/**
* PHPUnit testing with assertEquals
* #return void
*/
public function testTellName()
{
// create the class object
$mockObj = $this->getMockBuilder(Foo::class)
->disableOriginalConstructor()
->setMethods(null)
->getMock();
// get the object function result by passing the method parameter value
// pass different parameter value to get an invalid result
$result = $mockObj->tellName('John');
// validate the result with assertEquals()
$this->assertEquals('Hi John', $result);
}
}
Error and Success results:
Cheers!

What design pattern to use for a time-measurement profiler service?

I have a symfony2 application. It abstracts a bunch of external APIs, all of them implementing an ExternalApiInterface.
Each ExternalApiInterface has a lot of methods, e.g. fetchFoo and fetchBar.
Now, I want to write a service that measures the time of each method call of an instance of an ExternalApiInterface.
My current thinking is to implement a StopWatchExternalApiDecorator, that wraps each method call. Yet this approach leads, in my understanding, to code duplication.
I think I am going to use the StopWatch component for the time measurement, yet this feels odd:
class StopWatchExternalApiDecorator implements ExternalApiInterface {
public function __construct(ExternalApiInterface $api, Stopwatch $stopWatch)
{
$this->api = $api;
$this->stopWatch = $stopWatch;
}
public function fetchBar() {
$this->stopWatch->start('fetchBar');
$this->api->fetchBar()
$this->stopWatch->stop('fetchBar');
}
public function fetchFoo() {
$this->stopWatch->start('fetchFoo');
$this->api->fetchFoo()
$this->stopWatch->stop('fetchFoo');
}
}
It seems like I am hurting the DNRY (do not repeat yourself) approach. Am I using the right pattern for this kind of problem, or is there something else more fit? More fit in the sense of: One place to do all the measurement, and no code duplication.
I also dislike of having to touch the decorator in case there will be a new method in the interface. In my mind, that should be independent.
i am thinking of some apis i worked on that use one generic function for calls and a method parameter
heres some very basic pseudocode
public function call($method = 'fetchBar',$params=array()){
$this->stopWatch->start($method);
$this->{"$method"}($params);
$this->stopWatch->stop($method);
}
private function fetchBar(){
echo "yo";
}
maybe that helps
I went with the decorator approach, just on a different level.
In my architecture, api service was using an HttpClientInterface, and each request was handled in the end with a call to doRequest. So there, the decorator made most sense without code duplication:
<?php
namespace Kopernikus\BookingService\Component\Http\Client;
use Kopernikus\BookingService\Component\Performance\PerformanceEntry;
use Psr\Http\Message\RequestInterface;
use Psr\Http\Message\ResponseInterface;
use Psr\Log\LoggerInterface;
use Symfony\Component\Stopwatch\Stopwatch;
/**
* ProfileClientDecorator
**/
class ProfileClientDecorator implements HttpClientInterface
{
/**
* #var Stopwatch
*/
private $stopwatch;
/**
* #var HttpClientInterface
*/
private $client;
/**
* #var LoggerInterface
*/
private $logger;
/**
* ProfileClientDecorator constructor.
* #param HttpClientInterface $client
* #param Stopwatch $stopwatch
* #param LoggerInterface $logger
*/
public function __construct(HttpClientInterface $client, Stopwatch $stopwatch, LoggerInterface $logger)
{
$this->client = $client;
$this->stopwatch = $stopwatch;
$this->logger = $logger;
}
/**
* #param RequestInterface $request
*
* #return ResponseInterface
*/
public function doRequest(RequestInterface $request)
{
$method = $request->getMethod();
$response = $this->doMeasuredRequest($request, $method);
$performance = $this->getPerformance($method);
$this->logPerformance($performance);
return $response;
}
/**
* #param RequestInterface $request
* #param string $method
*
* #return ResponseInterface
*/
protected function doMeasuredRequest(RequestInterface $request, $method)
{
$this->stopwatch->start($method);
$response = $this->client->doRequest($request);
$this->stopwatch->stop($method);
return $response;
}
/**
* #param $method
* #return PerformanceEntry
*/
protected function getPerformance($method)
{
$event = $this->stopwatch->getEvent($method);
$duration = $event->getDuration();
return new PerformanceEntry($duration, $method);
}
/**
* #param PerformanceEntry $performance
*/
protected function logPerformance(PerformanceEntry $performance)
{
$context = [
'performance' => [
'duration_in_ms' => $performance->getDurationInMs(),
'request_name' => $performance->getRequestName(),
],
];
$this->logger->info(
"The request {$performance->getRequestName()} took {$performance->getDurationInMs()} ms",
$context
);
}
}
And in my services.yml:
performance_client_decorator:
class: Kopernikus\Component\Http\Client\ProfileClientDecorator
decorates: http.guzzle_client
arguments:
- #performance_client_decorator.inner
- #stopwatch
- #logger

PHP static keyword used with new in building an object

I am reading about Patterns in OOP and came across this code for the singleton pattern:
class Singleton
{
/**
* #var Singleton reference to singleton instance
*/
private static $instance;
/**
* gets the instance via lazy initialization (created on first usage)
*
* #return self
*/
public static function getInstance()
{
if (null === static::$instance) {
static::$instance = new static;
}
return static::$instance;
}
/**
* is not allowed to call from outside: private!
*
*/
private function __construct()
{
}
/**
* prevent the instance from being cloned
*
* #return void
*/
private function __clone()
{
}
/**
* prevent from being unserialized
*
* #return void
*/
private function __wakeup()
{
}
}
The part in question is static::$instance = new static;. What exactly does new static do or how does this example work. I am familiar with your average new Object but not new static. Any references to php documentation would help greatly.
basically that is a extendable class, and whenever you call getInstance() you will get a singleton of the whatever class you call it in (that extends this singleton class). If you only use it in one instance, you could hardcode the classname, or use new self if you had hardcoded this in your class.
Also, the singleton is regarded a anti-pattern, see the answer her for more details on this pattern why-is-singleton-considered-an-anti-pattern

How can I pass extra parameters to the routeMatch object?

I'm trying to unit test a controller, but can't figure out how to pass some extra parameters to the routeMatch object.
I followed the posts from tomoram at http://devblog.x2k.co.uk/unit-testing-a-zend-framework-2-controller/ and http://devblog.x2k.co.uk/getting-the-servicemanager-into-the-test-environment-and-dependency-injection/, but when I try to dispatch a request to /album/edit/1, for instance, it throws the following exception:
Zend\Mvc\Exception\DomainException: Url plugin requires that controller event compose a router; none found
Here is my PHPUnit Bootstrap:
class Bootstrap
{
static $serviceManager;
static $di;
static public function go()
{
include 'init_autoloader.php';
$config = include 'config/application.config.php';
// append some testing configuration
$config['module_listener_options']['config_static_paths'] = array(getcwd() . '/config/test.config.php');
// append some module-specific testing configuration
if (file_exists(__DIR__ . '/config/test.config.php')) {
$moduleConfig = include __DIR__ . '/config/test.config.php';
array_unshift($config['module_listener_options']['config_static_paths'], $moduleConfig);
}
$serviceManager = Application::init($config)->getServiceManager();
self::$serviceManager = $serviceManager;
// Setup Di
$di = new Di();
$di->instanceManager()->addTypePreference('Zend\ServiceManager\ServiceLocatorInterface', 'Zend\ServiceManager\ServiceManager');
$di->instanceManager()->addTypePreference('Zend\EventManager\EventManagerInterface', 'Zend\EventManager\EventManager');
$di->instanceManager()->addTypePreference('Zend\EventManager\SharedEventManagerInterface', 'Zend\EventManager\SharedEventManager');
self::$di = $di;
}
static public function getServiceManager()
{
return self::$serviceManager;
}
static public function getDi()
{
return self::$di;
}
}
Bootstrap::go();
Basically, we are creating a Zend\Mvc\Application environment.
My PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase is enclosed in a custom class, which goes like this:
abstract class ControllerTestCase extends TestCase
{
/**
* The ActionController we are testing
*
* #var Zend\Mvc\Controller\AbstractActionController
*/
protected $controller;
/**
* A request object
*
* #var Zend\Http\Request
*/
protected $request;
/**
* A response object
*
* #var Zend\Http\Response
*/
protected $response;
/**
* The matched route for the controller
*
* #var Zend\Mvc\Router\RouteMatch
*/
protected $routeMatch;
/**
* An MVC event to be assigned to the controller
*
* #var Zend\Mvc\MvcEvent
*/
protected $event;
/**
* The Controller fully qualified domain name, so each ControllerTestCase can create an instance
* of the tested controller
*
* #var string
*/
protected $controllerFQDN;
/**
* The route to the controller, as defined in the configuration files
*
* #var string
*/
protected $controllerRoute;
public function setup()
{
parent::setup();
$di = \Bootstrap::getDi();
// Create a Controller and set some properties
$this->controller = $di->newInstance($this->controllerFQDN);
$this->request = new Request();
$this->routeMatch = new RouteMatch(array('controller' => $this->controllerRoute));
$this->event = new MvcEvent();
$this->event->setRouteMatch($this->routeMatch);
$this->controller->setEvent($this->event);
$this->controller->setServiceLocator(\Bootstrap::getServiceManager());
}
public function tearDown()
{
parent::tearDown();
unset($this->controller);
unset($this->request);
unset($this->routeMatch);
unset($this->event);
}
}
And we create a Controller instance and a Request with a RouteMatch.
The code for the test:
public function testEditActionWithGetRequest()
{
// Dispatch the edit action
$this->routeMatch->setParam('action', 'edit');
$this->routeMatch->setParam('id', $album->id);
$result = $this->controller->dispatch($this->request, $this->response);
// rest of the code isn't executed
}
I'm not sure what I'm missing here. Can it be any configuration for the testing bootstrap? Or should I pass the parameters in some other way? Or am I forgetting to instantiate something?
What I did to solve this problem was move the Application::init() and the configuration from the Bootstrap to the setUp() method. It takes a while to load, but it works.
My Bootstrap has only the code needed to configure the autoloader, while the setUp() method has something similar to the old Bootstrap::go() code.

Categories