Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 8352199
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 9, 20262026-06-09T08:53:50+00:00 2026-06-09T08:53:50+00:00

Lets say I have a method: someMethod(X anObject) Where X is a type of

  • 0

Lets say I have a method:

someMethod(X anObject)

Where X is a type of object that is extremely complex. By this I mean it is not something one can easily instantiate on the fly. I need to somehow unit test someMethod, but I cannot so simply create an X object to put in as parameters.

So I first think to try and mock the object, but the problem I run in to is the someMethod function calls many methods of anObject, meaning this X object that is being mocked has a latge amount of functions that need to be called, and thus need to be mock-expected. To make things worse, these X object methods being called return more X objects, meaning I have to mock objects, to expect mock method calls, to return more mock objects.

Regarding this scenario I have a few questions, as I’m new to the concept of unit testing:

  1. The lengthy unit test method aside, I find my unit test to not only be testing as to whether a method works or not, but also specifying the implementation (because I’m basically specifying most of the code that is being called in the method itself with the mock-expects). Is this a problem (mostly to the concept of unit testing itself)?
  2. Is there any way to get around this, even if only to make my unit test methods be a lot less verbose and more maintainable?
  3. I thought about taking a serialized X object from somewhere else, saving that, and then whenever I call my unit test method, I would unserialize my X object and run that as parameters. This is just some random idea I thought of the top of my head; does anyone actually do this?

In case anyone is wondering what exactly I’m doing, I’m using the IDebugContextListener interface to grab debugging information regarding data on a stackframe at a given step on the java debugger. The “X” that I am referring to are objects that are defined by the interface here, including objects such as IValue, IVariable, and IStackframe. All these variables are provided to me by the Java debugger during runtime.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-09T08:53:51+00:00Added an answer on June 9, 2026 at 8:53 am

    The fact that you have this difficulty is a symptom of a design problem. When something is hard to test, refactor until it isn’t hard to test.

    If one object needs to call too many methods of another, then encapsulation is poor, and responsibilities are poorly placed. Presumably, the Single Responsibility Principle is not being followed. If code calls methods that return objects, and must call methods on those in turn, then the Law of Demeter is not being followed.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Lets say I have a method that looks like this: public static String[] parseFoo(Foo
Let's say that I have a method that looks like this: def raise_if_client_status_error(xml_resp) #
How to raise combobox_SelectedIndexChanged(object sender, EventArgs e) programmatically? Lets say i have method called
Lets say we have alert method of window object. I would like to enhance
I have class AClass and a method someMethod that gets an Object array as
Right lets say I have a method something like : - (void)doStuff:(NSString *)doStuffWith; Can
Lets say I have a method that is constantly receiving input every 10ms, adds
Lets say we have a method below. How would you implement auhorization that would
So, lets say I have a method that contains an annotation like so: @Override
Lets say I have a method like this: IQueryable<MyFlatObject> GetMyFlatObjects() { using (var context

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.