Re: [MO-java-users] MockSocket

[<st...@m3...>]

There are a couple of alternatives. One is to wrap the Socket class in a th=
in veneer that implements just the functionality you need and which can the=
n be mocked. That gives you a clear description of how /you/ use sockets, r=
ather than the generic underlying library, and gives you somewhere to hang =
all those helper methods. You then either have to take the interaction with=
 Socket on faith, test it with functional tests, or something like that.

If you really want to get in there, you could look at AspectJ to allow you =
to intercept the calls although, in practice, it's just an automated way to=
 implement the same idea.

S.

> Ah, think I see your point. The problem is Socket is a final class so
> the only way to mock it is to wrap it in an object which is mockable.
> This is what the alt classes are for these are interfaces which mirror
> the Java API + wrappers for the Java API versions and mocks of the
> wrappers. This allows you to provide a mock enviroment for testing
> against things like Socket.
>=20
> The draw back is that you to uses this method you have to write your
> code to use the interfaces not the actually API classes. It does get a
> bit ugly when you have to interface with a 3rd party class which
> requires a java.net.Socket as you have to get the real socket from the
> wrapper and pass it into these classes. You can make this neater by
> wrapping the 3rd party classes up in as well though.