我正在构建一个类库,它将有一些公共和私有方法。我希望能够对私有方法进行单元测试(主要是在开发过程中,但也可以用于将来的重构)。
正确的做法是什么?
我正在构建一个类库,它将有一些公共和私有方法。我希望能够对私有方法进行单元测试(主要是在开发过程中,但也可以用于将来的重构)。
正确的做法是什么?
当前回答
在我看来,你应该只对类的公共API进行单元测试。
为了对方法进行单元测试,将其设为公共,会破坏封装,暴露实现细节。
一个好的公共API解决了客户端代码的直接目标,并且完全解决了这个目标。
其他回答
我想在这里创建一个清晰的代码示例,您可以在任何想要测试私有方法的类上使用它。
在您的测试用例类中只包括这些方法,然后按照指示使用它们。
/**
*
* @var Class_name_of_class_you_want_to_test_private_methods_in
* note: the actual class and the private variable to store the
* class instance in, should at least be different case so that
* they do not get confused in the code. Here the class name is
* is upper case while the private instance variable is all lower
* case
*/
private $class_name_of_class_you_want_to_test_private_methods_in;
/**
* This uses reflection to be able to get private methods to test
* @param $methodName
* @return ReflectionMethod
*/
protected static function getMethod($methodName) {
$class = new ReflectionClass('Class_name_of_class_you_want_to_test_private_methods_in');
$method = $class->getMethod($methodName);
$method->setAccessible(true);
return $method;
}
/**
* Uses reflection class to call private methods and get return values.
* @param $methodName
* @param array $params
* @return mixed
*
* usage: $this->_callMethod('_someFunctionName', array(param1,param2,param3));
* {params are in
* order in which they appear in the function declaration}
*/
protected function _callMethod($methodName, $params=array()) {
$method = self::getMethod($methodName);
return $method->invokeArgs($this->class_name_of_class_you_want_to_test_private_methods_in, $params);
}
$this->_callMethod('_someFunctionName', array(param1,param2,param3));
只需要按照它们在原始私有函数中出现的顺序发出参数
我使用PrivateObject类。但如前所述,最好避免测试私有方法。
Class target = new Class();
PrivateObject obj = new PrivateObject(target);
var retVal = obj.Invoke("PrivateMethod");
Assert.AreEqual(retVal);
I don't agree with the "you should only be interested in testing the external interface" philosophy. It's a bit like saying that a car repair shop should only have tests to see if the wheels turn. Yes, ultimately I'm interested in the external behavior but I like my own, private, internal tests to be a bit more specific and to the point. Yes, if I refactor, I may have to change some of the tests, but unless it's a massive refactor, I'll only have to change a few and the fact that the other (unchanged) internal tests still work is a great indicator that the refactoring has been successful.
You can try to cover all internal cases using only the public interface and theoretically it's possible to test every internal method (or at least every one that matters) entirely by using the public interface but you may have to end up standing on your head to achieve this and the connection between the test cases being run through the public interface and the internal portion of the solution they're designed to test may be difficult or impossible to discern. Having pointed, individual tests that guarantee that the internal machinery is working properly is well worth the minor test changes that come about with refactoring - at least that's been my experience. If you have to make huge changes to your tests for every refactoring, then maybe this doesn't make sense, but in that case, maybe you ought to rethink your design entirely. A good design should be flexible enough to allow for most changes without massive redesigns.
首先,您不应该测试代码的私有方法。你应该测试“公共接口”或API,即类的公共内容。API是所有公开给外部调用者的公共方法。
原因是一旦您开始测试类的私有方法和内部结构,您就将类的实现(私有的东西)耦合到您的测试中。这意味着当您决定更改实现细节时,您也必须更改您的测试。
出于这个原因,你应该避免使用internalsvisibletoattribute。
以下是Ian Cooper关于这个主题的演讲:Ian Cooper: TDD,哪里出了问题
JAVA语言
在这里,您可以使用模拟行为覆盖测试类的特定方法。
对于下面的代码:
public class ClassToTest
{
public void methodToTest()
{
Integer integerInstance = new Integer(0);
boolean returnValue= methodToMock(integerInstance);
if(returnValue)
{
System.out.println("methodToMock returned true");
}
else
{
System.out.println("methodToMock returned true");
}
System.out.println();
}
private boolean methodToMock(int value)
{
return true;
}
}
测试类将是:
public class ClassToTestTest{
@Test
public void testMethodToTest(){
new Mockup<ClassToTest>(){
@Mock
private boolean methodToMock(int value){
return true;
}
};
....
}
}