JMock assertIsSatisfied in TearDown?

Question

I don't know why, but I have always written my JMock tests like this:

@Test
public void testMyThing() throws Exception {
    mockery.checking(new Expectations() {{
        oneOf(mockObj).foo();
    }});
    testObj.bar(); // calls mockObj.foo()
    mockery.assertIsSatisfied();
}

But when there are many tests, is it better to move assertIsSatisfied to the tear-down?

@After
public void tearDown() throws Exception {
    mockery.assertIsSatisfied();
}

score 5 · Accepted Answer · answered Aug 23 '11 at 22:47

The recommended way to do this is to use the JMock runner. Annotate the class with

@RunWith(JMock.class)
public class TestClass {

This will call the assertion at the right place in the test lifecycle. Teardown isn't the right place as a failure might not be reported in correctly and might mess up other cleanup.

We also have a mockery rule in the repository that works with the new @Rule infrastructure.

score 0 · Answer 2 · answered Jul 08 '11 at 12:58

Yes, I tend to do it in teardown. It keeps the focus of the individual test methods on what they're actually testing, by removing the boilerplate out into the @After- it's critical to me that tests are as expressive and readable as possible.

In fact, I sometimes take it further than that, and use a JMockSupport base class that handles the Mockery for me (as well as providing convenience implementations of mock(...)). This is just a convenience, of course, and by no means a requirement like it was in JUnit 3.

Please consider using the runner or the new rule implementation. If you use @After, the exception will not be thrown at the right time in the test lifecycle. — Steve Freeman, Jun 06 '12 at 13:19

JMock assertIsSatisfied in TearDown?

2 Answers2