testing methods that accept Class arguments

Question

I'm trying to figure out how test a small library I'm working on . Using this simplified method as an example:

private int countMappableFields(Class<?> type) {
    int mappableFields = 0;
    Field[] fields = type.getFields();
    for (int i = 0; i < fields.length ; i++) {
        if (FieldHelper.isMappable(fields[i]))
            mappableFields++;               
    }
    return mappableFields;
}

Should I define a couple of classes in separate files and reference them in all my tests? Is there a different approach that will allow to construct an object for each case?

jdmichal · Accepted Answer · 2011-05-12 00:02:24Z

1

You can define the classes inline in your test class; there's no reason to make separate files for them.

public class TestCase {
    private static class NoFieldClass
    {
    }

    // And so on.

    @Test
    public void shouldFindZeroMappableFieldsInNoFieldClass() {
        assertTrue(0 == countMappableFields(NoFieldClass.class));
    }
}

This keeps your test source code area clean. It will create multiple class files, but at least the inline classes you define will look like "TestCase$NoFieldClass.class" instead of being the top-level "NoFieldClass.class".

edited May 12, 2011 at 0:02

answered May 11, 2011 at 23:51

jdmichal

11.2k4 gold badges47 silver badges42 bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

Comments

ColinD · Accepted Answer · 2011-05-11 23:52:33Z

0

I'd typically just make a private static class inside the test class for that sort of thing. If you have multiple test files needing to do the same sort of thing, you might want to create top level classes instead.

answered May 11, 2011 at 23:52

ColinD

110k30 gold badges205 silver badges205 bronze badges

1 Comment

jdmichal Over a year ago

I wouldn't ever make them common, because that then ties the tests together, coupling them when there's likely no reason to other than laziness.

Steve B. · Accepted Answer · 2011-05-11 23:55:44Z

0

Depends on what you're testing for. If you're doing some sort of customized reflection (e.g. FieldHelper is only returning a subset of fields for some reason) you might want to actually test the objects you're going to be using it on) - i.e. actually run your reflection tests on a map<CLass,Integer> where the classes are mapped to the expected values.

answered May 11, 2011 at 23:55

Steve B.

57.6k12 gold badges99 silver badges134 bronze badges

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

testing methods that accept Class arguments

3 Answers 3

Comments

1 Comment

Comments

Your Answer

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

3 Answers 3

Comments

1 Comment

Comments

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Related