paparazzi VS Mockito

Component API tests are written for all components in the library. These are Paparazzi snapshot tests that are parameterized to cover all the combinations of values for the properties in the API of a given component. Additionally, they include as parameters: color theme, layout direction, and optionally other properties that may be relevant to the component under test (e.g., font scale).

Looks really nice. Sadly, I wasn't able to test it because it doesn't support application module

Curious what you mean by hilt refuses to work and what you have tried? Usually though if I'm testing the UI of the app, I might use paparazzi for screenshot tests because it doesn't have to run the test on device. Then for a UI integration test for navigation and user flows, use espresso and replace the network data sources with mocks which in your case would be with hilt android test rule and test install in annotation .

/** * Finds all files in the components module which have Compose previews * and generates Paparazzi screenshot tests for them. * * The generated tests can then be used to record screenshots with * ./gradlew components:recordPaparazziInternalDebug * * To verify that the current implementation matches the recorded screenshots * ./gradlew components:verifyPaparazziInternalDebug */ fun main() { val path = System.getProperty("user.dir") ?: error("Can't get user dir") // Paparazzi does not currently work in the app module: https://github.com/cashapp/paparazzi/issues/107 // For now this is hardcoded to only check files in the components module. // If we pull our compose files out of the app module to a separate module this code has to be updated. File(path).walk().filter { it.path.contains("/components/src/main/java") && it.extension == "kt" }.forEach { if (it.readText().contains("@Preview")) { processFileWithPreviews(it) } } } /** * Reads the given file, finds the names of all the functions annotated with @Preview * and uses them to generate a Paparazzi test file with one test for each preview. */ private fun processFileWithPreviews(file: File) { val lines = file.readLines() val previewNames = mutableListOf() var saveNextFunctionName = false var packageName = "" lines.forEachIndexed { i, line -> if (i == 0) { packageName = line.split(" ").last() } if (line.contains("@Preview")) { saveNextFunctionName = true } if (saveNextFunctionName && line.startsWith("fun ")) { previewNames += line.split(" ")[1].removeSuffix("()") saveNextFunctionName = false } } val pathString = file.path.replace("src/main", "src/test").split("java").first() + "java" val testFilePath = pathString.toPath() generatePaparazziTest(packageName, file.nameWithoutExtension + "PaparazziTest", testFilePath, previewNames) } fun generatePaparazziTest(packageName: String, fileName: String, path: Path, previewNames: List) { val classBuilder = TypeSpec.classBuilder(fileName) .superclass(PaparazziTest::class) .addAnnotation( AnnotationSpec.builder(Suppress::class) // KotlinPoet does not let us remove redundant public modifiers or Unit return types for the functions, // but we don't mind for generated code as long as the tests work .addMember("\"RedundantVisibilityModifier\", \"RedundantUnitReturnType\"") .build() ) previewNames.forEach { classBuilder.addFunction( FunSpec.builder(it.removeSuffix("Preview").usLocaleDecapitalize()) .addStatement("paparazziRule.snapshot { $it() }") .addAnnotation(Test::class) .build() ) } val testFile = FileSpec.builder(packageName, fileName) .addType(classBuilder.build()) .addFileComment("AUTO-GENERATED FILE by generate_paparazzi_tests.kt\nDO NOT MODIFY") .build() val nioPath = path.toNioPath() testFile.writeTo(nioPath) }

The good thing is, Square got us covered once more, in regards to the flaky emulators, by providing a screenshot-testing library that does not require an emulator: https://cashapp.github.io/paparazzi/

Mockito 5 Released (1 min)🎉 https://github.com/mockito/mockito/releases/tag/v5.0.0

For those using a "release" testBuildType for integration tests, what does your mocking setup look like? My app is stuck on Mockito 2.23.4, because higher (> 1.8.12) versions of Byte Buddy required beyond that point [do not play nicely with non-debuggable APKs](https://github.com/mockito/mockito/issues/2302). Solutions I've considered so far:

Mockito

The code is pretty self explanatory but here's a quick run down. o.getClass().getDeclaredFields() gets us an array of all the fields. We then have a enhanced for loop that loops over the array. Check if the field is annotated field.isAnnotationPresent(Gucci.class). If it is then we set its modifier to true with field.setAccessible(true);. If we don't do this and the field is private we will get an error. Then we get the binary name of the field, field.getGenericType().getTypeName();, remember its just the package and the class name. Lastly we set the value of the field, field.set(o,dynamicInjection(classLoader,binaryName). With that we have now created a dependency injection annotation with the Junit 5 extension model. Now I am sure you can see the tower of exceptions, which is obviously not ideal. I'm not sure how I want to handle all the exceptions yet. However, I will be digging around the Mockito code base to see if I can find how they handle all their exceptions.

Mockito 3.11.* releases

Hi, I've been trying to write parquet files on android for the past couple of days, and have really been struggling to find a solution. My original hypothesis was to just use the java parquet implementation (https://github.com/apache/parquet-mr), but I've since realized that not all java libraries play well with Android. I've gone through essentially dependency hell trying to franken-fit the library into my project, and imported as much as i could before hitting walls such as this one (https://github.com/mockito/mockito/issues/841).