使用 Mockito 时，模拟和间谍有什么区别?
使用 Mockito 间谍的用例是什么?
What would be a use case for a use of a Mockito spy?
在我看来，每个间谍用例都可以通过模拟处理，使用 callRealMethod.
It seems to me that every spy use case can be handled with a mock, using callRealMethod.
我可以看到的一个区别是，如果您希望大多数方法调用是真实的，它可以节省一些代码行来使用模拟与间谍.是这样还是我错过了更大的图景?
One difference I can see is if you want most method calls to be real, it saves some lines of code to use a mock vs. a spy. Is that it or am I missing the bigger picture?
推荐答案
答案在文档:
真正的部分模拟(自 1.8.0 起)
Real partial mocks (Since 1.8.0)
最后，经过多次内部辩论&邮件列表上的讨论，部分模拟支持已添加到 Mockito.以前我们将部分模拟视为代码异味.但是，我们发现了部分模拟的合法用例.
Finally, after many internal debates & discussions on the mailing list, partial mock support was added to Mockito. Previously we considered partial mocks as code smells. However, we found a legitimate use case for partial mocks.
在 1.8 版之前，spy() 没有产生真正的部分模拟，这让一些用户感到困惑.阅读更多关于间谍的信息:这里 或在 javadoc 中用于 spy(Object) 方法.
Before release 1.8 spy() was not producing real partial mocks and it was confusing for some users. Read more about spying: here or in javadoc for spy(Object) method.
callRealMethod() 是在 spy() 之后引入的，但 spy() 当然是留在那里，以确保向后兼容.
callRealMethod() was introduced after spy(), but spy() was left there of course, to ensure backward compatibility.
否则，你是对的:间谍的所有方法都是真实的，除非被存根.除非调用 callRealMethod()，否则模拟的所有方法都会被存根.一般来说，我更喜欢使用 callRealMethod()，因为它不会强迫我使用 doXxx().when() 成语而不是传统的 when().thenXxx()
Otherwise, you're right: all the methods of a spy are real unless stubbed. All the methods of a mock are stubbed unless callRealMethod() is called. In general, I would prefer using callRealMethod(), because it doesn't force me to use the doXxx().when() idiom instead of the traditional when().thenXxx()
相关文章