Why @Mock Annotated Object Is Null

2021 May 19

Mockito provides annotations like @Mock, @Spy, @Captor to make code simpler. Since most of our code is just copied from Google search and Stack Overflow, we may use these Mockito annotations like below, after quick reading of Google search results like this article.

@RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class)
class OrderTest {
    @Captor
    ArgumentCaptor<Offer> offerCaptor;

    @Test
    void test() {
      // use the `offerCaptor` object ...
    }

However, when run, the test throws NullPointerException due to the offerCaptor is null, even though it’s annotated by @Captor.

(Spending hours of Googling and debugging.)

The root cause of NPE is that the test is using JUnit 5, but @RunWith is a JUnit 4 annotation.

@RunWith no longer exists; superseded by @ExtendWith.

Therefore, @RunWith(MockitoJUnitRunner.class) is totally ignored by JUnit 5, no setup happens for objects annotated by @Captor.

To support JUnit 5 @ExtendWith, Mockito provides a MockitoExtension class.

This extension is the JUnit Jupiter equivalent of our JUnit4 MockitoJUnitRunner.

Below code has no NPE, for test cases using JUnit 5 and Mockito annotations.

@ExtendWith(MockitoExtension.class)
class OrderTest {
    @Captor
    ArgumentCaptor<Offer> offerCaptor;

Some Thoughts

It would be better if JUnit 5 warns us if it finds the obsolete JUnit 4 @RunWith, instead of failing silently.

Another solution is that, if a project is going to use JUnit 5, just exclude the JUnit 4 from the dependencies of the project. So using @RunWith would be a compile error.

CompletableFuture: join() vs. get()

2021 Mar 23

What’s the difference between join() and get() of the CompletableFuture class?

Both of them wait for the future completion. The only difference is what kind of exceptions these two methods throw. The get(), originated in the Future interface, throws “checked exceptions”. While join() throws “unchecked exceptions”.

In old days, like Java 1.5 era when Future.get() was designed, checked exceptions might be preferred. Nowadays, unchecked exceptions are more preferred, therefore join() is preferred.

As per Javadoc of CompletableFuture,

To simplify usage in most contexts, this class also defines methods join() and getNow(T) that instead throw the CompletionException directly in these cases.

In other words, join() is simpler to use, in the sense of exception handling. It’s kind of an official recommendation.

Compare Two OffsetDateTime of the Same Instant

2021 Mar 16

For two Java OffsetDateTime objects of the same instant, but with different timezone offset, to check whether they represent the same point in time, the isEqual method should be used.

var date1 = OffsetDateTime.parse("2008-12-03T11:00+01:00");
var date2 = OffsetDateTime.parse("2008-12-03T12:00+02:00");
date1.isEqual(date2); // the result is true
date1.equals(date2); // the result is false
date1.compareTo(date2); // the result < 0

In the above code, both of the OffsetDateTime objects represent “2008-12-03T10:00Z”. However, the equals or the compareTo method will tell these two object are not “equal”.

The OffsetDateTime class uses a field of LocalDateTime and a field of ZoneOffset to represent an instant. Its equals method cares about whether all these field of two objects are same or not. Obviously, fields of date1 are not equals with ones of date2.

The compareTo has same behavior as equals.

It is “consistent with equals”, as defined by Comparable.

As per Javadoc of OffsetDateTime, what isEqual does is dateTime1.toInstant().equals(dateTime2.toInstant()). That is OffsetDateTime object are convert to Instant object first, and use the equals of Instant for comparison.

From the Javadoc of Instant,

An instantaneous point on the time-line.

the class stores a long representing epoch-seconds and an int representing nanosecond-of-second, … The epoch-seconds are measured from the standard Java epoch of 1970-01-01T00:00:00Z

An Instant object has no timezone info stored, only epoch of fixed UTC timezone stored, a long and a int.

Side note: what’s the different between ZonedDateTime and OffsetDateTime

The major difference is that ZonedDateTime knows Daylight saving time (DST), while OffsetDateTime does not. It’s because OffsetDateTime only stores simple offset to UTC, while ZonedDateTime stores much richer timezone info.

Mod in Java Produces Negative Numbers

2021 Feb 1

The problem here is that in Python the % operator returns the modulus and in Java it returns the remainder. These functions give the same values for positive arguments, but the modulus always returns positive results for negative input, whereas the remainder may give negative results.

-21 mod 4 is 3 because -21 + 4 x 6 is 3.

But -21 divided by 4 gives -5 with a remainder of -1.

Jackson Mix-in Annotations

2020 May 20

Jackson has a feature called Mix-in annotations. With this feature, we can write cleaner code for the domain classes. Imagine we have domain classes like below.

// package com.example
public interface Item {
    ItemType getType();
}

@Value
public class FooItem implements Item{
    @NonNull String fooId;

    @Override
    public ItemType getType() {
        return ItemType.FOO;
    }
}

When implement these domain classes, no Jackson annotation is put on them. To support serialization and deserialization with Jackson for these classes, add “Mix-in” classes, for example in a separate package called com.example.jackson.

Add ItemMixin below to let Jackson be able to serialize and deserialize Item and its subclasses.

@JsonTypeInfo(
        use = JsonTypeInfo.Id.NAME,
        include = JsonTypeInfo.As.PROPERTY,
        property = "type")
@JsonSubTypes({
        @JsonSubTypes.Type(value = FooItem.class, name = "FOO")
        // ...
})
public abstract class ItemMixin {
}
// merge the Jackson annotations in the Mix-in class into the Item class,
// as if these annotations are in the Item class
objectMapper.addMixIn(Item.class, ItemMixin.class);

String json = "[{\"fooId\": \"1\", \"type\": \"FOO\"}]";
List<Item> items = mapper.readValue(json, new TypeReference<List<Item>>(){});

Note that FooItem is implemented as an immutable class using @Value from Lombok. With @Value annotated, FooItem has no default constructor, which makes Jackson unable to serialize it by default. Add FooItemMixin below to fix it.

@JsonIgnoreProperties(value={"type"}, allowGetters=true)
abstract class FooItemMixin {
    @JsonCreator
    public FooItemMixin(@JsonProperty("fooId") String fooId) {

    }
}

With help of Mix-in annotations, the domain classes don’t have to be compromised for Jackson support. All Jackson relevant annotations are in separate Mix-in classes in a separate package. Further, we could provide a simple Jackson module like below.

@Slf4j
public class MixinModule extends SimpleModule {
    @Override
    public void setupModule(SetupContext context) {
        context.setMixInAnnotations(Item.class, ItemMixin.class);
        context.setMixInAnnotations(FooItem.class, FooItemMixin.class);
        log.info("module set up");
    }
}

The consumers of the domain classes can simple register this module to take in all the Mix-in annotations.

objectMapper.registerModule(new MixinModule());

Jackson Mix-in helps especially if the domain classes are from a third party library. In this case, the source of the domain classes cannot be modified, using Mix-in is more elegant than writing custom serializers and deserializers.

Which Accessor Style? "Fluent" vs. "Java Bean"

2020 May 19

Basically, there are two styles of accessor naming convention in Java.

One is the traditional “Java Bean” style.

public class Item {
    ItemType getType();
}

Another is called the “fluent” style.

public class Item {
    ItemType type();
}

The fluent style saves some typing when writing code, also makes code a bit less verbose, item.type().

For example, the Lombok library supports this fluent style.

lombok.accessors.fluent = [true | false] (default: false)
If set to true, generated getters and setters will not be prefixed with the bean-standard ‘get, is or set; instead, the methods will use the same name as the field (minus prefixes).

Which style is better?

Actually, the verbose Java Bean style, is the better one. It’s because a lot of third party libraries are acknowledging the Java Bean style. For example, if Item is going to be serialized by the Jackson library as a JSON string, the fluent style wouldn’t work out of the box. Also, most of DTO mapping libraries are using the Java Bean style too. Therefore, using the standard Java Bean accessor style save effort when integrate our classes with other libraries and frameworks.

With the Lombok library and the auto-completion in modern IDEs, the Java Bean style doesn’t necessarily mean more typing.

The contains() Method in Java Collection Is Not "Type Safe"

2020 May 8
Currency currency;
//...
if(currency.getSupportedCountries().contains(country)) {
    //...
}

The Currency.getSupportedCountries() returns a Collection. Originally, the returned Collection was Collection<Country>. The country object in the above if-condition was of type Country. The program has been well tested and worked as expected.

However, due to whatever reason, the getSupportedCountries() is refactored to return a Collection<String>. The Java compiler complains nothing about the refactor. But the if-condition now is never true in any cases, since the equals() method of String has no idea about the equality with Country and vice versa. A bug! It’s hard to detect this kind of bug, if the code is not well covered by unit tests or end-to-end tests.

In this sense, the contains() method in Java Collection is not type safe.

How to Avoid

First, never change the behavior of an API when refactor. In the above case, the signature of the getSupportedCountries() API has changed. This is a breaking change, which usually causes the client code fails to compile. Unfortunately, in above case the client code doesn’t fail fast in the compile phase. It’s better to add new API like getSupportedCountryCodes() which returns a Collection<String>, and @Deprecated the old API, which can be further deleted some time later.

Second, make code fully covered by test cases as much as possible. Test cases can detect the bug earlier in the test phase.

Why contains() Is Not Generic

Why contains() is not designed as contains(E o), but as contains(Object o)? There are already some discussion on this design in StackOverflow, like this one and this one. It’s said it’s no harm to let methods like contains() in Collection be no generic. Being no generic, the contains() can accept a parameter of another type, which is seen as a “flexible” design. However, the above case shows that this design does have harm and cannot give developers enough confidence.

A method accepting a parameter of Object means it accepting any type, which is too “dynamic” for a “static” language.

Another question is why a static language needs a “root” Object?

The if-else Control Flow Using Optional

2020 Mar 27

Sometimes you may want to write the if-else control flow based on an Optional object.

For example, an API from a third party library declares Optional as its return type. You need to compose an if-else like control flow using that Optional object. Of course, it can be done by testing isPresent() in a traditional if-else statement.

var itemOpt = service.getItem(itemId);
if (itemOpt.isPresent()) {
    addToOrder(itemOpt.get());
} else {
    log.info("missing item {}", itemId);
    sendOutItemMissedEvent();
}

The above code doesn’t take any advantage of Optional. Actually, since Java 9 the ifPresentOrElse​(Consumer<? super T>, Runnable) method can be used to implement such control flow, which is a bit more elegant.

service.getItem(itemId).ifPresentOrElse(
    item -> {
        addToOrder(item);
    },
    () -> {
        log.info("missing item {}", itemId);
        sendOutItemMissedEvent();
    });

Print Exception Together With Parameterized Log Messages

2020 Mar 5

Often when use SLF4J, you may wonder if an exception object can be printed in the same parameterized log message together with other objects. Actually SLF4J supports it since 1.6.0.

log.error("failed to add item {}", "item-id-1", new RuntimeException("failed to add item"));

The SLF4J call above prints log message like below.

13:47:16.119 [main] ERROR example.TmpTest - failed to add item item-id-1
java.lang.RuntimeException: failed to add item
    at example.TmpTest.logErrorTest(TmpTest.java:10)
    ...
    ...

So it actually doesn’t need to log as below.

log.error("failed to add item {}", "item-id-1");
log.error("exception details:", new RuntimeException("failed to add item"));

Here is what the official FAQ says.

The SLF4J API supports parametrization in the presence of an exception, assuming the exception is the last parameter.

Use the first style to save one line.

SLF4J doesn’t clearly state this behavior in the Javadoc of Logger.error(String format, Object... arguments) (at least not in the 1.7.26 version). Maybe if a new method like below is added to Logger, programmer would find out this feature more easily.

public void error(String format, Throwable t, Object... arguments);

Java Generics, Bounded Wildcards and PECS

2019 Aug 8

With a class hierarchy below,

class Fruit {
    public void hello() {}
}
class Apple extends Fruit {}
class Banana extends Fruit {}

Lower Bounded Wildcards and Upper Bounded Wildcards

? super Fruit is called lower bounded wildcard.

? extends Fruit is called upper bounded wildcard.

Usually a class hierarchy is illustrated like,

   Object
     |
   Fruit
   /   \
Apple Banana

The base class is placed upper, subclasses placed lower.

For ? super Fruit, the lower bound of the type argument is determined, which is Fruit, so it’s called lower bounded wildcard. Similar, for type argument ? extends Fruit, its upper bound is fixed, so it’s called upper bounded wildcard.

”? super Fruit”

void func(List<? super Fruit> fruits) {
    fruits.add(new Fruit()); // ok
    fruits.add(new Apple()); // ok
    fruits.add(new Banana()); // ok
    // Error: Cannot resolve method 'hello'
    fruits.get(0).hello();  
}

The ? in the declaration List<? super Fruit> means fruits is a List of an unknown type. The ? super Fruit means the unknown type is limited to be Fruit or its super class (Object in this case). When invoke func(List<? super Fruit> ), List<Fruit> or List<Object> can be passed as the argument.

All the fruits.add(...) in the above code is ok, because no matter what type actually the type argument is Fruit, Apple, and Banana are the subtypes of that type. An Apple object is a Fruit (or Object) object, so an Apple object can be added into a List of Fruit (or Object).

Why fruits.get(0).hello() fails?

The actual type of the elements in the fruits List is undetermined when declare the method. When call a method on an element, the compiler needs to make sure the unknown type has the method. ? super Fruit in the type argument declaration sets bounds for the unknown type, one bound (“lower”) is type Fruit, the other bound (“upper”) is type Object To safely invoke methods on the unknown type, only methods of the most upper type can be invoked. Obviously, method hello is not from the most upper type (i.e. Object). If passing a List<Object> as the parameter, then obviously the elements in fruits would not have hello() method. Therefore the compiler raises the error.

”? extends Fruit”

void func(List<? extends Fruit> fruits){
    // Error: add(capture<? extends Fruit>) in List cannot be applied to add(Fruit)
    fruits.add(new Fruit()); 
    fruits.add(new Apple()); // similar error
    fruits.add(new Banana()); // similar error
    fruits.get(0).hello(); // ok
}

Similar, declaring the parameter as List<? extends Fruit> means fruits is an unknown type, and can be List<Fruit>, List<Apple> or List<Banana> when the method is invoked.

Why fruits.get(0).hello() is ok in this case?

Similar, ? extends Fruit sets bounds for the unknown type, the upper bound is determined as the type Fruit. The hello() method is from the most upper type, so the compiler knows it’s safe to call it within the func body.

Why statements like fruits.add(new Fruit()) fails?

The type of fruits is unknown, it doesn’t mean the type of fruits is “dynamic”. Being “dynamic” means the type of fruits can be List<Fruit> at some point, then be List<Apple> at some other point. It’s not possible in Java, since Java is a static language. The two types, List<Fruit> and List<Apple>, have nothing to do with each other (List<Apple> is not a subtype of List<Fruit>). The type of the fruits parameter is determined on the invocation of func. For a specific invocation, the type of fruits is determined and static. For example, with an invocation like func(new ArrayList<Apple>()), the statement fruits.add(new Fruit()) would raise compiler error (since a Fruit cannot be add()ed into a List<Apple>). To ensure all the possible invocation of func works, the compiler just can’t allow the statements like fruits.add(new Fruit()) appear in the method body.

What is “capture” (capture<? extends Fruit>)?

← Previous