If I am correct, SimpleTest will allow you to assert a PHP error is thrown. However, I can't figure out how to use it, based on the documentation. I want to assert that the object I pass into my constructor is an instance of MyOtherObject
class Object {
public function __construct(MyOtherObject $object) {
//do something with $object
}
}
//...and in my test I have...
public function testConstruct_ExpectsAnInstanceOfMyOtherObject() {
$notAnObject = 'foobar';
$object = new Object($notAnObject);
$this->expectError($object);
}
Where am I going wrong?
Type hinting throws E_RECOVERABLE_ERROR which can be caught by SimpleTest since PHP version 5.2. The following will catch any error containing the text "must be an instance of". The constructor of PatternExpectation takes a perl regex.
public function testConstruct_ExpectsAnInstanceOfMyOtherObject() {
$notAnObject = 'foobar';
$this->expectError(new PatternExpectation("/must be an instance of/i"));
$object = new Object($notAnObject);
}
PHP has both errors and exceptions, which work slightly different. Passing a wrong type to a typehinted function will raise an exception. You have to catch that in your test case. Eg.:
public function testConstruct_ExpectsAnInstanceOfMyOtherObject() {
$notAnObject = 'foobar';
try {
$object = new Object($notAnObject);
$this->fail("Expected exception");
} catch (Exception $ex) {
$this->pass();
}
}
or simply:
public function testConstruct_ExpectsAnInstanceOfMyOtherObject() {
$this->expectException();
$notAnObject = 'foobar';
$object = new Object($notAnObject);
}
But note that this will halt the test after the line where the exception occurs.
Turns out, SimpleTest doesn't actually support this. You can't catch Fatal PHP errors in SimpleTest. Type hinting is great, except you can't test it. Type hinting throws fatal PHP errors.
you have to expect the error before it happens, then SimpleTest will swallow it and count a pass, if the test gets to the end and there is no error then it will fail. (there's expectError and expectException that act in the same way, for PHP (non-fatal) errors and Exceptions, respectively.)
Related
I want to test that a method called foo() throws an exception. The problem is that I can't get PHPUnit expectException() to catch the exception.
foo() looks something like this:
public function foo()
{
$params = $this->readAndFormatConfig();
// exception actually gets thrown in this method
$this->method->throws->exception($params);
}
If I catch the exception manually it works fine, like this:
public function testFoo()
{
$badConfig = new Config([]);
$driver = new bar($badConfig);
$exceptionThrown = false;
try {
$driver->foo();
} catch (Exception $e) {
$exceptionThrown = true;
}
$this->assertTrue($exceptionThrown);
}
If I catch it using expectException, like this:
public function testFoo()
{
$badConfig = new Config([]);
$driver = new bar($badConfig);
$this->expectException(Exception::class);
$driver->foo();
}
the test fails and I get this exception:
MyTestClass::testFoo Invalid argument supplied for foreach()
The output of get_class($e) is PHPUnit_Framework_Error_Warning which surprised me, but explains why the first test works but the second doesn't.
I'd like to either ignore the warning and wait until a real exception is thrown, or get the original warning, not PHPUnit_Framework_Error_Warning.
I'm using php 5.6.32 and PHPUnit 5.7.15
Adding the following to boostrap.php converts warnings to exceptions.
function warningToException($errno, $errstr, $errfile, $errline)
{
throw new Exception($errstr . " on line " . $errline . " in file " . $errfile);
}
set_error_handler("warningToException", E_WARNING);
This allowed the following test pass.
public function testFoo()
{
$badConfig = new Config([]);
$driver = new bar($badConfig);
$this->expectException(Exception::class);
$driver->foo();
}
I think a better method would be to expect PHPUnit_Framework_Error_Warning in the test as ishegg suggested.
What I ended up actually doing was making sure the object I was passing to foreach was traversable before entering the loop.
public function foo()
{
if (is_array($x) || $x instanceof \Traversable) {
// do stuff
} else {
// return false;
}
}
I think it makes more sense to refactor the application code in this case. What I'm really trying to test is that the function foo returns false if the application is misconfigured, so handling the misconfiguration properly seems like the right path in my opinion.
If you stumble upon this question for some reason and really need to convert warnings to an exception class other than PHPUnit_Framework_Error_Warning this is how I did it.
Thanks to ishegg for pointing me in the right direction.
i am trying to test a function when i know error i going to be thrown. the function looks like this:
function testSetAdsData_dataIsNull(){
$dataArr = null;
$fixture = new AdGroup();
try{
$fixture->setAdsData($dataArr);
} catch (Exception $e){
$this->assertEquals($e->getCode(), 2);
}
$this->assertEmpty($fixture->ads);
$this->assertEmpty($fixture->adIds);
}
Now i am trying to use the phpunit exceptions assertions methods to replace the try catch part but i can't figure out how to do that.
i did lots of reading including this post PHPUnit assert that an exception was thrown? but i couldnt really understand how it shuold be implemented.
i tried something like this:
/**
* #expectedException dataIsNull
*/
function testSetAdsData_dataIsNull(){
$dataArr = null;
$fixture = new AdGroup();
$this->setExpectedException('dataIsNull');
$fixture->setAdsData($dataArr);
$this->assertEmpty($fixture->ads);
$this->assertEmpty($fixture->adIds);
}
but obviously it didn't work and i got this error:
1) adGroupTest::testSetAdsData_dataIsNull
ReflectionException: Class dataIsNull does not exist
what am i doing wrong and how exactly can i assert if exception was thrown plz?
I generally use the #expectedException annotations for just such cases. See all exception-related annotations here:
/**
* #expectedException \Exception
* #expectedExceptionCode 2
*/
function testSetAdsData_dataIsNull()
{
$dataArr = null;
$fixture = new AdGroup();
$fixture->setAdsData($dataArr);
}
Checking that $fixture->ads is really null doesn't really add up here, you can add these asserts prior to the call that actually triggers an exception:
$this->assertNull($fixture->ads);
$fixture->setAdsData($dataArr);//throws exception
You're unit testing. This test serves a clear purpose: it makes sure an exception is thrown in a given situation. If it does, then that's where the test ends.
Still, if you want to keep those assertEmpty calls, you could do this:
try {
$fixture->setAdsData($dataArr);
$e = null;
} cathc (Exception $e) {}
$this->assertEmpty($fixture->ads);
$this->assertEmpty($fixture->adIds);
if (!$e instanceof \Exception) {
//if the exception is not thát important:
$this->markTestIncomplete('No Exception thrown');
//do other stuff here... possibly
$this->fail('The exception was not thrown');
}
throw $e;//throw exception a bit later
An alternative approach would be to call $this->setExpectedException manually as explained here. Since we don't seem to know/care what the exception message will look like, I'm going to use the setExpectedExceptionRegExp method:
$fixture = new AdGroup();
$this->setExpectedExceptionRegExp(
//exception class, message regex, exception code
'Exception', '/.*/'. 2
);
$fixture->setAdsData(null);//passing null seems to be what you're doing anyway
I'm calling a method that I know could cause an error and I'm trying to handle the error by wrapping the code in a try/catch statement...
class TestController extends Zend_Controller_Action
{
public function init()
{
// Anything here happens BEFORE the View has rendered
}
public function indexAction()
{
// Anything `echo`ed here is added to the end of the View
$model = new Application_Model_Testing('Mark', 31);
$this->view->sentence = $model->test();
$this->loadDataWhichCouldCauseError();
$this->loadView($model); // this method 'forwards' the Action onto another Controller
}
private function loadDataWhichCouldCauseError()
{
try {
$test = new Application_Model_NonExistent();
} catch (Exception $e) {
echo 'Handle the error';
}
}
private function loadView($model)
{
// Let's pretend we have loads of Models that require different Views
switch (get_class($model)) {
case 'Application_Model_Testing':
// Controller's have a `_forward` method to pass the Action onto another Controller
// The following line forwards to an `indexAction` within the `BlahController`
// It also passes some data onto the `BlahController`
$this->_forward('index', 'blah', null, array('data' => 'some data'));
break;
}
}
}
...but the problem I have is that the error isn't being handled. When viewing the application I get the following error...
( ! ) Fatal error: Class 'Application_Model_NonExistent' not found in /Library/WebServer/Documents/ZendTest/application/controllers/TestController.php on line 23
Can any one explain why this is happening and how I can get it to work?
Thanks
use
if (class_exists('Application_Model_NonExistent')) {
$test = new Application_Model_NonExistent;
} else {
echo 'class not found.';
}
like #prodigitalson said you can't catch that fatal error.
An error and an exception are not the same thing. Exceptions are thrown and meant to be caught, where errors are generally unrecoverable and triggered with http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.trigger-error.php
PHP: exceptions vs errors?
Can I try/catch a warning?
If you need to do some cleanup because of an error, you can use http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.set-error-handler.php
Thats not an exception, thats a FATAL error meaning you cant catch it like that. By definition a FATAL should not be recoverable.
Exception and Error are different things. There is an Exception class, which you are using and that $e is it's object.
You want to handle errors, check error handling in php-zend framework. But here, this is a Fatal error, you must rectify it, can not be handled.
I'm testing some legacy code that extends the default php exception object. This code prints out a custom HTML error message.
I would like to mock this exception object in such a way that when the tested code generates an exception it will just echo the basic message instead of giving me the whole HTML message.
I cannot figure out a way to do this. It seems like you can test for explicit exceptions, but you can't change in a general way the behavior of an exception, and you also can't mock up an object that extends a default php functionality. ( can't think of another example of this beyond exceptions... but it would seem to be the case )
I guess the problem is, where would you attach the mocked object?? It seems like you can't interfere with 'throw new' and this is the place that the object method is called....
Or if you could somehow use the existing phpunit exception functionality to change the exception behavior the way you want, in a general way for all your code... but this seems like it would be hacky and bad....
EDIT: here is some code to make things clearer:
class FooTest extends PHPUnit_Framework_TestCase{
public function testBar(){
include '/path/to/file.php'; //generates exception
$this->assertTrue($baz);
}
}
...
//overridden exception class
class Foo_Exception extends ErrorException{
...
so, my question, is there a way to deal with this overriden class, without doing it on a case by case basis? what if I'm not testing the behavior of the exception, just the code that causes the exception?
I would first write a test that captures the exception generation behavior:
include '/path/to/file.php'; //generates exception
public function testCatchFooException() {
try {
$this->assertTrue($baz);
}
catch (Exception $expected) {
$this->assertEquals('This is expected html from exception', $expected->getMessage());
return;
}
$this->fail('An expected Exception has not been raised Foo_Excpetion.');
}
Now you can do several things with this coverage test. You can either fix up the exception, or fix the code that causes the exception.
Another thing you can do is wrap the entire file.php in a class:
class FooClass {
function runFoo() {
include '/path/to/file.php'; //generates exception
}
}
Then add tests while using extract method until you isolate exception.
[EDIT]
Here is some serious procedural legacy code:
<?php
require_once 'helper.php'; //helper file
function countNewMessages($user_id) {
}
function countNewOrders() {
}
function countNewReturns() {
}
function getDB($init = NULL) {
}
function getDisplay() {
}
getDisplay();
?>
And here is the wrapped class:
<?php
require_once ''; //helper file
class Displayer {
function countNewMessages($user_id) {
}
function countNewOrders() {
}
function countNewReturns() {
}
function getDB($init = NULL) {
}
function getDisplay() {
}
}
?>
And now I can test it:
function testGetDisplay() {
$display = new Displayer();
$this->assertEquals('html code', $display->getDisplay());
}
And test the individual functions in it. And if I can further sprout methods on it.
The above test would be considered a coverage test. There may be bugs in it, but that is what it does. So as I sprout methods the get more code coverage from tests by sprouting that I can make sure I don't break the output.
The extened PHP exception object "prints" a costum HTML error page? You mean its error message is an entire HTML page? That's not very clever...
What you can do about it is to replace the default exception handler (see this function), call getMessage on the exception and parse the HTML error page to extract the message. Then you can print the error message and kill the script. Like this (in PHP 5.3):
set_exception_handler(
function (Exception $e) {
die(parse_html_error_page($e->getMessage()));
}
);
OK, I misunderstood the question. If the script you're testing catches the error and then echoes an error page, then this has nothing to do with exceptions. You can use the ob_ family:
ob_start();
include $file;
$contents = ob_get_contents();
if (result_is_error($contents))
die(extract_error_from_result($contents));
else
echo $contents;
ob_end_clean();
I have come accross to this function below and I am wondering wether this is the right way of using the error handling of try/catch.
public function execute()
{
$lbReturn = false;
$lsQuery = $this->msLastQuery;
try
{
$lrResource = mysql_query($lsQuery);
if(!$lrResource)
{
throw new MysqlException("Unable to execute query: ".$lsQuery);
}
else
{
$this->mrQueryResource = $lrResource;
$lbReturn = true;
}
}
catch(MysqlException $errorMsg)
{
ErrorHandler::handleException($errorMsg);
}
return $lbReturn;
}
Codewise it is correct/works, However the power of try-catch is that when an Exception is thrown from deep down in one of the functions you're calling.
Because of the "stop execution mid-function and jump all the way back to the catch block".
In this case there are no deep-down exceptions therefore I would write it like this:
(Assuming there is a function "handleErrorMessage" in the ErrorHandler.)
public function execute() {
$lsQuery = $this->msLastQuery;
$lrResource = mysql_query($lsQuery);
if(!$lrResource) {
ErrorHandler::handleErrorMessage("Unable to execute query: ".$lsQuery);
return false;
}
$this->mrQueryResource = $lrResource;
return true;
}
Which I find more readable.
No. Throwing an exception in this case is simply a GOTO, but with a (slightly) prettier face.
Why have a call to ErrorHandler::handleException here anyway?
Just throw the exception, but never catch it. Then in the global initialization code for your app have a function with the following signature:
function catchAllExceptions(Exception $e)
Then call:
set_exception_handler('catchAllExceptions');
This will cause all uncaught excpetions to be passed as an argument to catchAllExceptions(). Handling all uncaught exceptions in one place like this is good, as you reduce code replication.
Well it is not really a good implementation since you throw the exception and you look for that exception in catch. So the answer of Visage is true.
You should use a global error handler instead of a tr-catch usage like in your code.
If you are not sure of the type of the error and occurance but want to continue the execution of the code although an exception had occured, then a try-catch block will help.