Note:all code working fine without phpunit
file 1:common.php:
public function setNIMUID( $NIMUID ) {
if(is_bool(Cache::get("$NIMUID"))) {
$user_Array=array("_JID"=>(string)$NIMUID);
Cache::set("$NIMUID",$user_Array);
}
$this->NIMUID=(string)$NIMUID ;
}
File 2 :memcache.class.php
method 1:
protected function __construct(array $servers) {
if(!$servers) {
trigger_error('No memcache servers to connect', E_USER_WARNING);
}
for($i = 0, $n = count($servers); $i<$n; ++ $i) {
($con = memcache_connect(key($servers[$i]), current($servers[$i])))&&$this->mc_servers[] = $con;
}
$this->mc_servers_count = count($this->mc_servers);
if(!$this->mc_servers_count) {
$this->mc_servers[0] = null;
}
}
method 2:
static function get($key) {
return self::singleton()->getMemcacheLink($key)->get($key);
}
method 3:
static function singleton() {
//Write here where from to get the servers list from, like
global $memcache_servers;
self::$instance||self::$instance = new Cache($memcache_servers);
return self::$instance;
}
File 3 : commonTest.php
public function testCommon()
{
$Common = new Common();
$Common->setNIMUID("saurabh4");
}
$memcache_servers variable :
$memcache_servers = array(
array('localhost'=>'11211'),
array('127.0.0.1'=>'11211')
);
Error :
Fatal error: Call to undefined function memcache_connect()
Unit tests should be repeatable, fast and isolated. That means that you shouldn't connect to external services to unit test your classes.
If you want to test that Common is working fine, you should test its behaviour, which in this case is that is calling the Cache class as you'd expect.
For that, you'll need to use mocks. With mocks you can set some expectations, like that the object will be called in a specific manner. If your class is called the memcached class as expected, you can assume your functionality is working fine. How do you know the Cache class is working fine? Because the Cache class would have its own unit test.
In order to use mocks (or stubs), you need to change the way you program and avoid static calles like the one in Cache::set(). Instead, you should use class instances and normal calls. How? Passing the Cache instance to your Common class. This concept is called Dependency injection. Your Common code would look like this:
public function __construct( $cache ) {
$this->cache = $cache;
}
public function setNIMUID( $NIMUID ) {
if(is_bool($this->cache->get("$NIMUID"))) {
$user_Array=array("_JID"=>(string)$NIMUID);
$this->cache->set("$NIMUID",$user_Array);
}
$this->NIMUID=(string)$NIMUID ;
}
Related
I am writing a small script in PHP and am using a Profiler for the development zone to see which functions/actions are slow etc.
$this->profiler = new \Fabfuel\Prophiler\Profiler();
Then I am using it in different methods all over the place (passing it via DI, using League\Container\Container class):
$profilerSeg = $profiler->profilerStartSegment('Page Load','CMS');
...
$profiler->profilerStopSegment($profilerSeg);
Problem is, I only want to use this in development. Thought about an IF statement:
if($this->environment === 'DEV')
$profilerSeg = $profiler->profilerStartSegment('Page Load','CMS');
...
if($this->environment === 'DEV')
$profiler->profilerStopSegment($profilerSeg);
but it looks ugly to have it everywhere. Then I thought about making a "fake profiler" that gets passed if the script is in production so all the calls would return NULL.
What is the best way to handle such a case: a class needed only in development but that should not be loaded in production?
Typical oop uses inheritance
Most approaches define a root class that all (or most) other classes extend
Class main {
private $profiler;
public __construct(){
$this->profiler = new \Fabfuel\Prophiler\Profiler();
// you can comment and uncomment the above line.
}
public profStart(){
if (!empty($this->profiler)) {
$this->profiler->profilerStartSegment($a,$b);
}
}
}
Class someThing Extends main {
// $profiler is already set as part of the constructor
$this->profStart('someThing','strange');
}
Class otherThing Extends someThing {
// but if you want a constructor, you have to daisy-chain the class constructors
public __construct() {
parent::__construct();
}
}
Alternately, swap out an empty object
...but this is generally considered bad practice
Class deadendObject {
public __get($var){}
public __set($var,$val){}
public __call($var,$args){}
// see: http://php.net/manual/en/language.oop5.magic.php
}
if ($profileMe) {
$this->profiler = new \Fabfuel\Prophiler\Profiler();
} else {
$this->profiler = new deadendObject();
}
Set whether to do stuff in the Profiler object itself
Class Profiler {
public $enabled = true;
public function doSomething(){
if($this->enabled) {
// do stuff
}
}
}
$profiler = new \Fabfuel\Prophiler\Profiler();
$profiler->enabled = false;
Best is a combination of inheritance, and having the profiler handle behavior changes.
Class Profiler {
public $enabled = true;
public function doSomething($var = "unknown"){
if($this->enabled) {
// do stuff
}
}
}
Class main {
public $profiler;
public __construct(){
$this->profiler = new Profiler();
$this->profiler->enabled = true;
// better still would be to define this behavior according to a settings file, or environment variables with getenv()
}
}
Class someThing Extends main {
// $profiler is already set as part of the constructor
$this->profiler->doSomething('neighborhood');
}
I ain't afraid 'o no ghosts!
I am trying to write a unit test for a function that immediately loads an object from a different class that uses the input to the function as a parameter. I am new to php unit testing and couldn't find anything that address my particular problem. A few leads that I had that led to no avail was using an injector, and trying to us a reflection.
The code I am trying to write a unit test for is:
public static function isUseful($item) {
$objPromo = MyPromoCodes::Load($item->SavedSku);
if (!is_null($objPromo)
&& ($objPromo->PromoType == MyPromoCodes::Interesting_Promo_Type)) {
return true;
}
return false;
}
My attempt at mocking this out:
public function testIsUseful() {
$injector = $this->getMockBuilder('MyPromoCodes')
->setMethods(array('Load'))
->getMock();
$objPromo = $this->getMock('MyPromoCodes');
$objPromo->PromoType = 'very interesting promo type';
$injector->set($objPromo, 'MyPromoCodes');
$lineItem1 = $this->getDBMock('LineItem');
$this->assertTrue(MyClass::isUseful($lineItem1));
}
however this doesn't work because there is no set method for this object....
Not sure what else to try, any help would be appreciated.
I made the library that makes static classes mocking possible:
class MyClass {
public static $myPromoCodes = 'myPromoCodes';
public static function isUseful($item) {
$objPromo = self::$MyPromoCodes::Load($item->SavedSku);
if (!is_null($objPromo)
&& ($objPromo->PromoType == MyPromoCodes::Interesting_Promo_Type)) {
return true;
}
return false;
}
}
class MyClassTest extends \PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase
{
public function testSomething()
{
$myClass = Moka::stubClass('MyClass');
$myClass::$myPromoCodes = Moka::stubClass(null, ['::Load' => (object)[
'PromoType' => MyPromoCodes::Interesting_Promo_Type
]]);
$this->assertTrue($myClass::isUseful((object)['SavedSku' => 'SKU']);
$this->assertEquals([['SKU']], $myClass::$myPromoCodes->moka->report('::Load'));
}
}
To start with you cannot mock static method with PHPUnit. At least not with 4.x and 5.x.
I would suggest a DI approach like this:
class MyClass
{
private $promoCodesRepository;
public function __construct(MyPromoCodesRepository $promoCodesRepository)
{
$this->promoCodesRepository = $promoCodesRepository;
}
public function isUseful(MyItem $item)
{
$objPromo = $this->promoCodesRepository->Load($item->SavedSku);
// ...
}
}
Here you can easily mock the Load method.
Unfortunately the "static" approach creates a lot of issues during tests so it is better to avoid it whenever possible.
I'm trying to create my first phpunit test and find myself needing to stub a method on an IMailer interface.
interface IMailer
{
public function send($to, $from, $cc, $subject, $body);
public function sent();
}
$mailer = $this->getMockBuilder(
'IMailer',
array('send', 'sent'))->getMock();
$mailer->method('send')->willRreturn(0);
However, I keep getting
PHP Fatal error:
Call to undefined method Mock_Mailer_13fc0a04::method()
in ...Test.php on line 16
a var_dump($mailer); results in
class Mock_IMailer_4c3e02a7#215 (1) {
private $__phpunit_invocationMocker =>
NULL
}
Working with the expect($this->any()) gives a dito error - it seems that the mocked object does not have any mock functionality...
I'm running phpunit 3.7.28, and php 5.5.9, on an ubuntu box.
How come? How can I fix it?
The getMockBuilder function accepts only the className as parameter. The correct way to initialize your mock object methods would be to use setMethods function (see phpunit docs)
$mailer = $this->getMockBuilder('IMailer')
->setMethods(array('send', 'sent'))
->getMock();
Additionally you probably want to have some expects definition also when you use your mock object:
$mailer->expects($this->any())
->method('send')
->willReturn(0);
EDIT
The above holds true for newer phpunit versions. For phpunit 3.7.28 the mock object usage is a bit different (i.e. the expects seems to be mandatory and willReturn is not yet available). For 3.7.28 version you should modify the second part to:
$mailer->expects($this->any())
->method('send')
->will($this->returnValue(0));
I would recommend updating to later phpunit version as it seems to be somewhat difficult to find documentation to this much older releases.
An alternative solution, for anybody that is still using old versions of PHPUnit, but still wants to be able to call method() directly, is to override the default mock object class template.
Copy MockObject/Generator/mocked_class.tpl.dist, and name the copy mocked_class.tpl. Then, just add the code for the method() method to the template:
public function method()
{
$any = new PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_Matcher_AnyInvokedCount;
$expects = $this->expects($any);
$args = func_get_args();
return call_user_func_array(array($expects, 'method'), $args);
}
This will allow you to call $mock->method() directly. However, you need to still use ->will($this->returnValue(0)) instead of ->willReturn(0). To do that, you need to introduce a custom invocation builder and invocation mocker:
class My_MockObject_Builder_InvocationMocker
extends PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_Builder_InvocationMocker {
public function willReturn( $value ) {
return $this->will( new PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_Stub_Return( $value ) );
}
}
class My_MockObject_InvocationMocker
extends PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_InvocationMocker {
public function expects( PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_Matcher_Invocation $matcher ) {
return new My_MockObject_Builder_InvocationMocker($this, $matcher);
}
}
And update your template again, to use My_MockObject_InvocationMocker instead of PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_InvocationMocker.
The full template would then look like this:
{prologue}{class_declaration}
{
protected static $staticInvocationMocker;
protected $invocationMocker;
{clone}{mocked_methods}
public function expects(PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_Matcher_Invocation $matcher)
{
return $this->__phpunit_getInvocationMocker()->expects($matcher);
}
public function method()
{
$any = new PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_Matcher_AnyInvokedCount;
$expects = $this->expects($any);
$args = func_get_args();
return call_user_func_array(array($expects, 'method'), $args );
}
public static function staticExpects(PHPUnit_Framework_MockObject_Matcher_Invocation $matcher)
{
return self::__phpunit_getStaticInvocationMocker()->expects($matcher);
}
public function __phpunit_getInvocationMocker()
{
if ($this->invocationMocker === NULL) {
$this->invocationMocker = new My_MockObject_InvocationMocker;
}
return $this->invocationMocker;
}
public static function __phpunit_getStaticInvocationMocker()
{
if (self::$staticInvocationMocker === NULL) {
self::$staticInvocationMocker = new My_MockObject_InvocationMocker;
}
return self::$staticInvocationMocker;
}
public function __phpunit_hasMatchers()
{
return self::__phpunit_getStaticInvocationMocker()->hasMatchers() ||
$this->__phpunit_getInvocationMocker()->hasMatchers();
}
public function __phpunit_verify()
{
self::__phpunit_getStaticInvocationMocker()->verify();
$this->__phpunit_getInvocationMocker()->verify();
}
public function __phpunit_cleanup()
{
self::$staticInvocationMocker = NULL;
$this->invocationMocker = NULL;
}
}{epilogue}
I am trying to add functions to class from a separate file, I wonder if this could be possible!
$mClass = new MyClass();
$mClass->new_Functions[0](10); // Is there a way to have it in this form?
class myClass
{
private $Pvar = 5;
$new_Fcuntions;
function __construct()
{
include('additional.functions.php');
$arr = get_defined_functions();
$this->new_Functions = $arr['user'];
// trying to call the function with parameter 10
call_user_func(array($this, $this->new_Functions[0]), 10);
}
}
[additional.functions.php] file
function operate($y)
{
return $this->Pvar * $y;
}
----- Edited ------- as it wasn't clear!
"additional.functions.php" is a module and there will be multiple modules to be added to the application, and every module could have more than single function and modules could call one another!
additional.functions.php [module file]
function operate($y)
{
return $this->Pvar * $y;
}
function do-more($foo)
{
return $this->operate(20) + $foo;
}
another.functions.php [another module]
function do-another($foo)
{
return $this->do-more(30) - $foo;
}
function add($foo, $bar)
{
return $foo + $bar;
}
appreciate every participation, its been a while since I am trying to maneuver around with it!
Is this possible or should I give up!
It looks to me like you are looking for Traits, which are a new feature as of PHP 5.4.0. Using traits, you can have snippets of code "mixed in" to other classes, a concept known as "horizontal reuse".
If you are not looking for traits, it's possible that you could do what you wanted with Runkit, however I would suggest staying as far away from it as possible, if you are not genuinely interested in PHP internals as well.
In any event, whatever you are trying to do is very interesting
I got it to work with dependency injection. The pvar has to be public or create a __get method to return the private variable. I also used the function name because it seems cleaner to me to use it via name rather than it's position in the list but if you want to keep that then just put $key where you see $value from the line: $this->function_list[$value] = ...
function operate($y, $that)
{
return $that->Pvar * $y;
}
class Example {
public $function_list = array();
private $Pvar = 5;
public function __construct()
{
$list = get_defined_functions();
$that = $this;
foreach ($list['user'] as $key => $value) {
$this->function_list[$value] = function() use ($value, $that) {
print call_user_func_array($value, array_merge(func_get_args(), array($that )));
};
}
}
public function __get($key)
{
if (isSet($this->$key)) {
return $this->$key;
} else {
throw new \Exception('Key "'.$key.'" does not exist');
}
}
}
$Ex = new Example();
$Ex->function_list['operate'](10);
If you want to extend MyClass from your modules (and not to initialize it, like in your example code), than you could do it in a way like this:
<?php
namespace modules\MyModuleA;
class MyClassExtension
{
private $MyObject;
public function __construct(\MyClass $MyObject)
{
$this->MyObject = $MyObject;
}
public function doSomething($anyParameter)
{
return $this->MyObject->doSomethingElse($anyParameter * 5, 42, 'foo');
}
}
And MyClass:
<?php
class MyClass extends \Extensible
{
// some code
}
abstract class Extensible
{
private $extensions = [];
public function extend($extension)
{
$this->extensions[] = $extension;
}
public function __call($methodName, $parameters)
{
foreach ($this->extensions as $Extension) {
if (in_array($methodName, get_class_methods($Extension))
return call_user_func_array([$Extension, $methodName], $parameters);
}
throw new \Exception('Call to undefined method ' . $methodName . '...');
}
public function hasExtension($extensionName)
{
return in_array($this->extensions, $extensionName);
}
}
And put it all together:
<?php
$moduleNames = ['MyModuleA', 'MyModuleB'];
$MyObject = new \MyClass;
foreach ($moduleNames as $moduleName) {
$className = '\\modules\\' . $moduleName . '\\MyClassExtension';
$module = new $className($MyObject);
$MyObject->extend($module);
}
// Now you can call a method, that has been added by MyModuleA:
$MyObject->doSomething(10);
You should add an interface for the extension classes of course...
The problem is: What happens if any code in your application calls a method of $MyObject, that is not there, because the module has not been loaded. You would always have to check if ($MyObject->hasExtension('ModuleA')) { ... }, but, of course, the application shouldn't be aware of any module. So I would not design an application in such a way.
I would suggest to use traits (mix-ins). See PHP reference
If you can have another class in that file instead of file with functions
- the best solution will be Traits
http://php.net/manual/en/language.oop5.traits.php
or using inheritance
If you move that code to class you can avoid a lot of unnecessary code. I mean:
include('additional.functions.php');
$arr = get_defined_functions();
$this->new_Functions = $arr['user'];
// trying to call the function with parameter 10
call_user_func(array($this, $this->new_Functions[0]), 10);
It'll be e.g.:
class myClass extends MyBaseClassWithMyAwesomeFunctions
{
private $Pvar = 5;
}
Maybe this approach helps you:
In the files with the additional functions, don't define named functions, but return a closure, that expects (at least) the object (instance of MyClass) as parameter:
<?php
// additional.functions.php
return function ($myObject) {
$Object->multiplyPvar($myObject->getTheNumber());
$Object->doSomethingElse(42, 'foo');
};
The client, that builds MyClass collects those functions from the files into the array:
<?php
$files = [
'/path/to/my/additional.functions1.php',
'/path/to/my/additional.functions2.php'
];
$initFunctions = [];
foreach ($files as $path)
$initFunctions[] = include $path;
$MyObject = new \MyClass($initFunctions);
The constructor then calls those functions:
<?php
class MyClass
{
public function __construct(array $additionalInitFunctions)
{
foreach ($additionalInitFunctions as $additionalInitFunction)
$additionalInitializerFunction($this); // you can also add parameters of course
}
}
This way the class keeps very well testable as well as the function files. Maybe this could help you in any way. You should never ever think about modifying the internal (private) state of an object directly from any code from outside of the class. This is not testable! Think about writing tests before you implement your code (called "test driven development"). You will see, it is not possible to test a class, if you allow any code outside of that class to modify the internal (private) state of the class instance. And you don't want to have this. If you change some internal implementation detail in your class without breaking the unit test of that class, you will anyways probably break some code in any of your additional.functions.php files and no test will tell you: "Hey: you've broken something right now".
I am looking to incorporate a testing framework into a project I am building and came across Enhance PHP which I like but I am having some difficulty finding relevant information on-line since "enhance php" is such a commonly used phrase.
Has anyone worked with this framework that might be able to point me toward some helpful guide? Have you worked with a unit test framework that you think is amazingly better?
Thanks in advance.
In response to Gotzofter, this is the class to be tested:
<?php
include_once('EnhanceTestFramework.php');
class ExampleClass
{
private $OtherClass;
function __construct($mock = null)
{
if ($mock == null)
$this->OtherClass = new OtherExampleClass();
else
$this->OtherClass = $mock;
}
public function doSomething()
{
return $this->OtherClass->getSomething(1, 'Arg2');
}
}
class OtherExampleClass
{
public function getSomething()
{
return "Something";
}
}
class ExampleClassTests extends \Enhance\TestFixture
{
public function setUp()
{
}
public function tearDown()
{
}
public function verifyWithAMock()
{
$mock = \Enhance\MockFactory::createMock('OtherExampleClass');
$mock->addExpectation(
\Enhance\Expect::method('getSomething')
->with(1, 'Arg2')
->returns('Something')
->times(1)
);
$target = new ExampleClass($mock);
$result = $target->doSomething();
\Enhance\Assert::areIdentical("Something", $result);
$mock->verifyExpectations();
}
}
\Enhance\Core::runTests();
look at my constructor for ExampleClass.
Because enhance-php's site example injects the $mock object by calling new ExampleClass($mock), I am forced to change my ExampleClass constructor to handle a $mock as an input parameter.
Do I have to handle this for all classes that I want to subject to unit testing with the framework?
Thanks.
This:
function __construct()
{
$this->OtherClass = new OtherExampleClass;
}
Should be:
function __construct($otherClass)
{
$this->OtherClass = $otherClass;
}
Your mock is never injected at this point in your test:
$target = new ExampleClass($mock);
One thing I would recommend no matter what testing framework you are using is type-hinting against the expected class, or interface.
<?php
class ExampleClass
{
private $OtherClass; // OtherClass instance
public function __construct(OtherClass $OtherClass=null)
{
// ...
}
}
I'm no di expert, but I don't see the problem in letting each class call new if an instance isn't provided for a particular dependency. You could also of course take the approach where you use setter methods to configure dependencies.
<?php
class class ExampleClass
{
private $OtherClass; // OtherClass instance
public function setOtherClass(OtherClass $OtherClass)
{
$this->OtherClass = $OtherClass;
}
}
It is lame that the ExampleClass in the sample code doesn't even define the doSomething method from the ExampleDependencyClassTests, but if I understand correctly it looks like Enhance PHP is not forcing you to take a particular style of dependency injection. You can write the test class however you want, so for example if you took the setter method approach I mentioned above, you could change the example mock code to
<?php
class ExampleDependencyClassTests extends \Enhance\TestFixture
{
public function verifyWithAMock()
{
$mock = \Enhance\MockFactory::createMock('ExampleDependencyClass');
$mock->addExpectation(
\Enhance\Expect::method('getSomething')
->with(1, 'Arg2')
->returns('Something')
->times(1)
);
$target = new ExampleClass();
$target->setExampleDependencyClass($mock);
$result = $target->doSomething();
$mock->verifyExpectations();
}
}
Of course it would probly make sense to make the appropriate revisions to the ExampleClass!
<?php
class ExampleClass
{
private $ExampleDependencyClass;
public function addTwoNumbers($a, $b)
{
return $a + $b;
}
public function setExampleDependencyClass(
ExampleDependencyClass $ExampleDependecyClass
) {
$this->ExampleDependecyClass = $ExampleDependecyClass;
}
public function doSomething($someArg)
{
return 'Something';
}
}
I've worked with PHPUnit quite a bit, and honestly you'll have to face the same challenges with Mocks there. My 2 cents, try to model your tests without Mocks if possible ;)
There is a tutorial on NetTuts titled Testing Your PHP Codebase With Enhance PHP, which will definitely help you to get started.
And there is a Quick Start Guide on Enhance PHP.