Best Practice for Unit Testing a Controller that depends on UserManager?
I have a controller with the following signature:
[Route("api/[controller]")]
[ApiController]
public class UsersController : ControllerBase
{
private ILogger<UsersController> _logger;
private readonly UserManager<IdentityUser> _usermanager;
public UsersController(ILogger<UsersController> logger, UserManager<IdentityUser> usermanager)
{
_usermanager = usermanager;
_logger = logger;
}
[HttpGet("{_uniqueid}")]
public async Task<ObjectResult> GetUser(string _uniqueid)
{
//Retrieve the object
try
{
var user = await _usermanager.FindByIdAsync(uniqueid);
var model = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<GetUserModel>(user.ToString());
return new ObjectResult(JsonConvert.SerializeObject(model));
}
catch(CustomIdentityNotFoundException e)
{
return new BadRequestObjectResult(("User not found: {0}", e.Message));
}
}
}
Right now my unit test looks like this:
public class UsersUnitTests
{
public UsersController _usersController;
private UserManager<IdentityUser> _userManager;
public UsersUnitTests()
{
_userManager = new MoqUserManager<IdentityUser>();
_usersController = new UsersController((new Mock<ILogger<UsersController>>()).Object, _userManager);
}
[Fact]
public async Task GetUser_ReturnsOkObjectResult_WhenModelStateIsValid()
{
//Setup
//Test
ObjectResult response = await _usersController.GetUser("realuser");
//Assert
//Should receive 200 and user data content body
response.StatusCode.Should().Be((int)System.Net.HttpStatusCode.OK);
response.Value.Should().NotBeNull();
}
}
and the Moq'd classes:
public class MoqUserManager<T> : UserManager<IdentityUser>
{
public MoqUserManager(IUserStore<IdentityUser> store, IOptions<IdentityOptions> optionsAccessor,
IPasswordHasher<IdentityUser> passwordHasher, IEnumerable<IUserValidator<IdentityUser>> userValidators,
IEnumerable<IPasswordValidator<IdentityUser>> passwordValidators, ILookupNormalizer keyNormalizer,
IdentityErrorDescriber errors, IServiceProvider services, ILogger<UserManager<IdentityUser>> logger)
: base(store, optionsAccessor, passwordHasher, userValidators, passwordValidators, keyNormalizer, errors, services, logger)
{
}
public MoqUserManager()
: base((new MoqUserStore().Store), new Mock<IOptions<IdentityOptions>>().Object,
new Mock<IPasswordHasher<IdentityUser>>().Object, new Mock<IEnumerable<IUserValidator<IdentityUser>>>().Object,
new Mock<IEnumerable<IPasswordValidator<IdentityUser>>>().Object, new Mock<ILookupNormalizer>().Object,
new Mock<IdentityErrorDescriber>().Object, new Mock<IServiceProvider>().Object, new Mock<ILogger<UserManager<IdentityUser>>>().Object)
{
}
}
public class MoqUserStore : IdentityUserStore
{
private Mock<IdentityUserStore> _store;
public MoqUserStore()
:base(new Mock<IdentityDbContext>().Object, new Mock<ILogger<IdentityUserStore>>().Object, null)
{
_store = new Mock<IdentityUserStore>(new Mock<IdentityDbContext>().Object, new Mock<ILogger<IdentityUserStore>>().Object, null);
_store.Setup(x => x.FindByIdAsync("realuser", default(CancellationToken))).Returns(Task.Run(() => new IdentityUser("realuser")));
_store.Setup(x => x.FindByIdAsync("notrealuser", default(CancellationToken))).Throws(new CustomIdentityNotFoundException());
_store.Setup(x => x.CreateAsync(new IdentityUser("realuser"), default(CancellationToken))).Returns(Task.Run(() => IdentityResult.Success));
}
public IdentityUserStore Store { get => _store.Object; }
}
I get reference not set to an instance of an object errors when the MoqUserManager constructor is called.
My question is: What is the best practice (I will settle for works but stinks to high heaven) for unit testing these types of controllers that depend on UserManager and/or SignInManager, and what is a easily repeatable way to mock the UserStore dependency?
c# unit-testing moq xunit asp.net-core-2.1
add a comment |
I have a controller with the following signature:
[Route("api/[controller]")]
[ApiController]
public class UsersController : ControllerBase
{
private ILogger<UsersController> _logger;
private readonly UserManager<IdentityUser> _usermanager;
public UsersController(ILogger<UsersController> logger, UserManager<IdentityUser> usermanager)
{
_usermanager = usermanager;
_logger = logger;
}
[HttpGet("{_uniqueid}")]
public async Task<ObjectResult> GetUser(string _uniqueid)
{
//Retrieve the object
try
{
var user = await _usermanager.FindByIdAsync(uniqueid);
var model = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<GetUserModel>(user.ToString());
return new ObjectResult(JsonConvert.SerializeObject(model));
}
catch(CustomIdentityNotFoundException e)
{
return new BadRequestObjectResult(("User not found: {0}", e.Message));
}
}
}
Right now my unit test looks like this:
public class UsersUnitTests
{
public UsersController _usersController;
private UserManager<IdentityUser> _userManager;
public UsersUnitTests()
{
_userManager = new MoqUserManager<IdentityUser>();
_usersController = new UsersController((new Mock<ILogger<UsersController>>()).Object, _userManager);
}
[Fact]
public async Task GetUser_ReturnsOkObjectResult_WhenModelStateIsValid()
{
//Setup
//Test
ObjectResult response = await _usersController.GetUser("realuser");
//Assert
//Should receive 200 and user data content body
response.StatusCode.Should().Be((int)System.Net.HttpStatusCode.OK);
response.Value.Should().NotBeNull();
}
}
and the Moq'd classes:
public class MoqUserManager<T> : UserManager<IdentityUser>
{
public MoqUserManager(IUserStore<IdentityUser> store, IOptions<IdentityOptions> optionsAccessor,
IPasswordHasher<IdentityUser> passwordHasher, IEnumerable<IUserValidator<IdentityUser>> userValidators,
IEnumerable<IPasswordValidator<IdentityUser>> passwordValidators, ILookupNormalizer keyNormalizer,
IdentityErrorDescriber errors, IServiceProvider services, ILogger<UserManager<IdentityUser>> logger)
: base(store, optionsAccessor, passwordHasher, userValidators, passwordValidators, keyNormalizer, errors, services, logger)
{
}
public MoqUserManager()
: base((new MoqUserStore().Store), new Mock<IOptions<IdentityOptions>>().Object,
new Mock<IPasswordHasher<IdentityUser>>().Object, new Mock<IEnumerable<IUserValidator<IdentityUser>>>().Object,
new Mock<IEnumerable<IPasswordValidator<IdentityUser>>>().Object, new Mock<ILookupNormalizer>().Object,
new Mock<IdentityErrorDescriber>().Object, new Mock<IServiceProvider>().Object, new Mock<ILogger<UserManager<IdentityUser>>>().Object)
{
}
}
public class MoqUserStore : IdentityUserStore
{
private Mock<IdentityUserStore> _store;
public MoqUserStore()
:base(new Mock<IdentityDbContext>().Object, new Mock<ILogger<IdentityUserStore>>().Object, null)
{
_store = new Mock<IdentityUserStore>(new Mock<IdentityDbContext>().Object, new Mock<ILogger<IdentityUserStore>>().Object, null);
_store.Setup(x => x.FindByIdAsync("realuser", default(CancellationToken))).Returns(Task.Run(() => new IdentityUser("realuser")));
_store.Setup(x => x.FindByIdAsync("notrealuser", default(CancellationToken))).Throws(new CustomIdentityNotFoundException());
_store.Setup(x => x.CreateAsync(new IdentityUser("realuser"), default(CancellationToken))).Returns(Task.Run(() => IdentityResult.Success));
}
public IdentityUserStore Store { get => _store.Object; }
}
I get reference not set to an instance of an object errors when the MoqUserManager constructor is called.
My question is: What is the best practice (I will settle for works but stinks to high heaven) for unit testing these types of controllers that depend on UserManager and/or SignInManager, and what is a easily repeatable way to mock the UserStore dependency?
c# unit-testing moq xunit asp.net-core-2.1
docs.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/mvc/controllers/…
– MDMoore313
Nov 23 '18 at 22:33
add a comment |
I have a controller with the following signature:
[Route("api/[controller]")]
[ApiController]
public class UsersController : ControllerBase
{
private ILogger<UsersController> _logger;
private readonly UserManager<IdentityUser> _usermanager;
public UsersController(ILogger<UsersController> logger, UserManager<IdentityUser> usermanager)
{
_usermanager = usermanager;
_logger = logger;
}
[HttpGet("{_uniqueid}")]
public async Task<ObjectResult> GetUser(string _uniqueid)
{
//Retrieve the object
try
{
var user = await _usermanager.FindByIdAsync(uniqueid);
var model = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<GetUserModel>(user.ToString());
return new ObjectResult(JsonConvert.SerializeObject(model));
}
catch(CustomIdentityNotFoundException e)
{
return new BadRequestObjectResult(("User not found: {0}", e.Message));
}
}
}
Right now my unit test looks like this:
public class UsersUnitTests
{
public UsersController _usersController;
private UserManager<IdentityUser> _userManager;
public UsersUnitTests()
{
_userManager = new MoqUserManager<IdentityUser>();
_usersController = new UsersController((new Mock<ILogger<UsersController>>()).Object, _userManager);
}
[Fact]
public async Task GetUser_ReturnsOkObjectResult_WhenModelStateIsValid()
{
//Setup
//Test
ObjectResult response = await _usersController.GetUser("realuser");
//Assert
//Should receive 200 and user data content body
response.StatusCode.Should().Be((int)System.Net.HttpStatusCode.OK);
response.Value.Should().NotBeNull();
}
}
and the Moq'd classes:
public class MoqUserManager<T> : UserManager<IdentityUser>
{
public MoqUserManager(IUserStore<IdentityUser> store, IOptions<IdentityOptions> optionsAccessor,
IPasswordHasher<IdentityUser> passwordHasher, IEnumerable<IUserValidator<IdentityUser>> userValidators,
IEnumerable<IPasswordValidator<IdentityUser>> passwordValidators, ILookupNormalizer keyNormalizer,
IdentityErrorDescriber errors, IServiceProvider services, ILogger<UserManager<IdentityUser>> logger)
: base(store, optionsAccessor, passwordHasher, userValidators, passwordValidators, keyNormalizer, errors, services, logger)
{
}
public MoqUserManager()
: base((new MoqUserStore().Store), new Mock<IOptions<IdentityOptions>>().Object,
new Mock<IPasswordHasher<IdentityUser>>().Object, new Mock<IEnumerable<IUserValidator<IdentityUser>>>().Object,
new Mock<IEnumerable<IPasswordValidator<IdentityUser>>>().Object, new Mock<ILookupNormalizer>().Object,
new Mock<IdentityErrorDescriber>().Object, new Mock<IServiceProvider>().Object, new Mock<ILogger<UserManager<IdentityUser>>>().Object)
{
}
}
public class MoqUserStore : IdentityUserStore
{
private Mock<IdentityUserStore> _store;
public MoqUserStore()
:base(new Mock<IdentityDbContext>().Object, new Mock<ILogger<IdentityUserStore>>().Object, null)
{
_store = new Mock<IdentityUserStore>(new Mock<IdentityDbContext>().Object, new Mock<ILogger<IdentityUserStore>>().Object, null);
_store.Setup(x => x.FindByIdAsync("realuser", default(CancellationToken))).Returns(Task.Run(() => new IdentityUser("realuser")));
_store.Setup(x => x.FindByIdAsync("notrealuser", default(CancellationToken))).Throws(new CustomIdentityNotFoundException());
_store.Setup(x => x.CreateAsync(new IdentityUser("realuser"), default(CancellationToken))).Returns(Task.Run(() => IdentityResult.Success));
}
public IdentityUserStore Store { get => _store.Object; }
}
I get reference not set to an instance of an object errors when the MoqUserManager constructor is called.
My question is: What is the best practice (I will settle for works but stinks to high heaven) for unit testing these types of controllers that depend on UserManager and/or SignInManager, and what is a easily repeatable way to mock the UserStore dependency?
c# unit-testing moq xunit asp.net-core-2.1
I have a controller with the following signature:
[Route("api/[controller]")]
[ApiController]
public class UsersController : ControllerBase
{
private ILogger<UsersController> _logger;
private readonly UserManager<IdentityUser> _usermanager;
public UsersController(ILogger<UsersController> logger, UserManager<IdentityUser> usermanager)
{
_usermanager = usermanager;
_logger = logger;
}
[HttpGet("{_uniqueid}")]
public async Task<ObjectResult> GetUser(string _uniqueid)
{
//Retrieve the object
try
{
var user = await _usermanager.FindByIdAsync(uniqueid);
var model = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<GetUserModel>(user.ToString());
return new ObjectResult(JsonConvert.SerializeObject(model));
}
catch(CustomIdentityNotFoundException e)
{
return new BadRequestObjectResult(("User not found: {0}", e.Message));
}
}
}
Right now my unit test looks like this:
public class UsersUnitTests
{
public UsersController _usersController;
private UserManager<IdentityUser> _userManager;
public UsersUnitTests()
{
_userManager = new MoqUserManager<IdentityUser>();
_usersController = new UsersController((new Mock<ILogger<UsersController>>()).Object, _userManager);
}
[Fact]
public async Task GetUser_ReturnsOkObjectResult_WhenModelStateIsValid()
{
//Setup
//Test
ObjectResult response = await _usersController.GetUser("realuser");
//Assert
//Should receive 200 and user data content body
response.StatusCode.Should().Be((int)System.Net.HttpStatusCode.OK);
response.Value.Should().NotBeNull();
}
}
and the Moq'd classes:
public class MoqUserManager<T> : UserManager<IdentityUser>
{
public MoqUserManager(IUserStore<IdentityUser> store, IOptions<IdentityOptions> optionsAccessor,
IPasswordHasher<IdentityUser> passwordHasher, IEnumerable<IUserValidator<IdentityUser>> userValidators,
IEnumerable<IPasswordValidator<IdentityUser>> passwordValidators, ILookupNormalizer keyNormalizer,
IdentityErrorDescriber errors, IServiceProvider services, ILogger<UserManager<IdentityUser>> logger)
: base(store, optionsAccessor, passwordHasher, userValidators, passwordValidators, keyNormalizer, errors, services, logger)
{
}
public MoqUserManager()
: base((new MoqUserStore().Store), new Mock<IOptions<IdentityOptions>>().Object,
new Mock<IPasswordHasher<IdentityUser>>().Object, new Mock<IEnumerable<IUserValidator<IdentityUser>>>().Object,
new Mock<IEnumerable<IPasswordValidator<IdentityUser>>>().Object, new Mock<ILookupNormalizer>().Object,
new Mock<IdentityErrorDescriber>().Object, new Mock<IServiceProvider>().Object, new Mock<ILogger<UserManager<IdentityUser>>>().Object)
{
}
}
public class MoqUserStore : IdentityUserStore
{
private Mock<IdentityUserStore> _store;
public MoqUserStore()
:base(new Mock<IdentityDbContext>().Object, new Mock<ILogger<IdentityUserStore>>().Object, null)
{
_store = new Mock<IdentityUserStore>(new Mock<IdentityDbContext>().Object, new Mock<ILogger<IdentityUserStore>>().Object, null);
_store.Setup(x => x.FindByIdAsync("realuser", default(CancellationToken))).Returns(Task.Run(() => new IdentityUser("realuser")));
_store.Setup(x => x.FindByIdAsync("notrealuser", default(CancellationToken))).Throws(new CustomIdentityNotFoundException());
_store.Setup(x => x.CreateAsync(new IdentityUser("realuser"), default(CancellationToken))).Returns(Task.Run(() => IdentityResult.Success));
}
public IdentityUserStore Store { get => _store.Object; }
}
I get reference not set to an instance of an object errors when the MoqUserManager constructor is called.
My question is: What is the best practice (I will settle for works but stinks to high heaven) for unit testing these types of controllers that depend on UserManager and/or SignInManager, and what is a easily repeatable way to mock the UserStore dependency?
c# unit-testing moq xunit asp.net-core-2.1
c# unit-testing moq xunit asp.net-core-2.1
edited Nov 23 '18 at 23:58
MDMoore313
asked Nov 23 '18 at 21:43
MDMoore313MDMoore313
1,8811326
1,8811326
docs.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/mvc/controllers/…
– MDMoore313
Nov 23 '18 at 22:33
add a comment |
docs.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/mvc/controllers/…
– MDMoore313
Nov 23 '18 at 22:33
docs.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/mvc/controllers/…
– MDMoore313
Nov 23 '18 at 22:33
docs.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/mvc/controllers/…
– MDMoore313
Nov 23 '18 at 22:33
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
I thought about the DI model and the dependencies of my controller. I only needed a handful of methods from UserManager, so I theorized about removing the dependency on UserManager from UsersController, and replacing it with some interface that implements the same signatures I needed from UserManager. Lets call that interface IMYUserManager:
public interface IMYUserManager
{
Task<IdentityUser> FindByIdAsync(string uniqueid);
Task<IdentityResult> CreateAsync(IdentityUser IdentityUser);
Task<IdentityResult> UpdateAsync(IdentityUser IdentityUser);
Task<IdentityResult> DeleteAsync(IdentityUser result);
}
Next, I needed to create a class that both is derived from UserManager and also implements IMYUserManager. The idea here is that implementing the methods from the interface will simply become overrides for the derived class, that way I get around FindByIdAsync (and the rest) being flagged as extension methods and requiring wrapping in a static class. Here is MyUserManager:
public class MYUserManager : UserManager<IdentityUser>, IMYUserManager
{
public MYUserManager(IUserStore<IdentityUser> store, IOptions<IdentityOptions> optionsAccessor,
IPasswordHasher<IdentityUser> passwordHasher, IEnumerable<IUserValidator<IdentityUser>> userValidators,
IEnumerable<IPasswordValidator<IdentityUser>> passwordValidators, ILookupNormalizer keyNormalizer,
IdentityErrorDescriber errors, IServiceProvider services, ILogger<UserManager<IdentityUser>> logger)
: base(store, optionsAccessor, passwordHasher, userValidators, passwordValidators, keyNormalizer, errors, services, logger)
{
}
public override Task<IdentityUser> FindByIdAsync(string userId)
{
return base.FindByIdAsync(userId);
}
//Removed other overridden methods for brevity; They also call the base class method
}
Almost home. Next, I naturally updated UsersController to use the IMYUserManager interface:
[Route("api/[controller]")]
[ApiController]
public class UsersController : ControllerBase
{
private ILogger<UsersController> _logger;
private readonly IMYUserManager _usermanager;
public UsersController(ILogger<UsersController> logger, IMYUserManager
usermanager)
{
_usermanager = usermanager;
_logger = logger;
}
}
And, naturally after that I have to make this dependency available to the service container for all who desire to feast upon:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddScoped<IMYUserManager, MYUserManager>();
services.AddMvc().SetCompatibilityVersion(CompatibilityVersion.Version_2_1);
}
And, finally, after verifying that actually builds, I updated the test class:
public class UsersControllerTests
{
public UsersController _usersController;
private Mock<IMYUserManager> _userManager;
public UsersControllerTests()
{
_userManager = new Mock<IMYUserManager>();
_usersController = new UsersController((new Mock<ILogger<UsersController>>
()).Object, _userManager.Object);
}
[Fact]
public async Task GetUser_ReturnsOkObjectResult_WhenModelStateIsValid()
{
//Setup
_userManager.Setup(x => x.FindByIdAsync("realuser"))
.Returns(Task.Run(() => new IdentityUser("realuser","realuser1")));
_usersController.ModelState.Clear();
//Test
ObjectResult response = await _usersController.GetUser("realuser");
//Assert
//Should receive 200 and user data content body
response.StatusCode.Should().Be((int)System.Net.HttpStatusCode.OK);
response.Value.Should().NotBeNull();
}
}
What makes this a good solution?
Several things:
Removing the dependency on UserManager from UsersController was inline with the DI model. Abstracting away the dependencies (therefore abstracting away implementation details like extension methods) and making them available not only to be mocked, but available to the entire IServiceCollection means that I only have 3 very simple steps when I need to implement another method for the user manager:
- Add the method signature to
IMYUserManager
- Override the method and call the base class implementation in
MYUserManager
- Mock new dependency inside of unit tests
I may revisit the scope of the service, I chose AddScoped() just to prove the concept, but performance and business requirements will choose whether or not that stays the same.
1
Good work reaching that conclusion. I did something similar stackoverflow.com/a/38673203/5233410 but I chose composition over inheritance to have more control over the exposed functionality.
– Nkosi
Nov 24 '18 at 13:14
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53453232%2fbest-practice-for-unit-testing-a-controller-that-depends-on-usermanagertuser%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I thought about the DI model and the dependencies of my controller. I only needed a handful of methods from UserManager, so I theorized about removing the dependency on UserManager from UsersController, and replacing it with some interface that implements the same signatures I needed from UserManager. Lets call that interface IMYUserManager:
public interface IMYUserManager
{
Task<IdentityUser> FindByIdAsync(string uniqueid);
Task<IdentityResult> CreateAsync(IdentityUser IdentityUser);
Task<IdentityResult> UpdateAsync(IdentityUser IdentityUser);
Task<IdentityResult> DeleteAsync(IdentityUser result);
}
Next, I needed to create a class that both is derived from UserManager and also implements IMYUserManager. The idea here is that implementing the methods from the interface will simply become overrides for the derived class, that way I get around FindByIdAsync (and the rest) being flagged as extension methods and requiring wrapping in a static class. Here is MyUserManager:
public class MYUserManager : UserManager<IdentityUser>, IMYUserManager
{
public MYUserManager(IUserStore<IdentityUser> store, IOptions<IdentityOptions> optionsAccessor,
IPasswordHasher<IdentityUser> passwordHasher, IEnumerable<IUserValidator<IdentityUser>> userValidators,
IEnumerable<IPasswordValidator<IdentityUser>> passwordValidators, ILookupNormalizer keyNormalizer,
IdentityErrorDescriber errors, IServiceProvider services, ILogger<UserManager<IdentityUser>> logger)
: base(store, optionsAccessor, passwordHasher, userValidators, passwordValidators, keyNormalizer, errors, services, logger)
{
}
public override Task<IdentityUser> FindByIdAsync(string userId)
{
return base.FindByIdAsync(userId);
}
//Removed other overridden methods for brevity; They also call the base class method
}
Almost home. Next, I naturally updated UsersController to use the IMYUserManager interface:
[Route("api/[controller]")]
[ApiController]
public class UsersController : ControllerBase
{
private ILogger<UsersController> _logger;
private readonly IMYUserManager _usermanager;
public UsersController(ILogger<UsersController> logger, IMYUserManager
usermanager)
{
_usermanager = usermanager;
_logger = logger;
}
}
And, naturally after that I have to make this dependency available to the service container for all who desire to feast upon:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddScoped<IMYUserManager, MYUserManager>();
services.AddMvc().SetCompatibilityVersion(CompatibilityVersion.Version_2_1);
}
And, finally, after verifying that actually builds, I updated the test class:
public class UsersControllerTests
{
public UsersController _usersController;
private Mock<IMYUserManager> _userManager;
public UsersControllerTests()
{
_userManager = new Mock<IMYUserManager>();
_usersController = new UsersController((new Mock<ILogger<UsersController>>
()).Object, _userManager.Object);
}
[Fact]
public async Task GetUser_ReturnsOkObjectResult_WhenModelStateIsValid()
{
//Setup
_userManager.Setup(x => x.FindByIdAsync("realuser"))
.Returns(Task.Run(() => new IdentityUser("realuser","realuser1")));
_usersController.ModelState.Clear();
//Test
ObjectResult response = await _usersController.GetUser("realuser");
//Assert
//Should receive 200 and user data content body
response.StatusCode.Should().Be((int)System.Net.HttpStatusCode.OK);
response.Value.Should().NotBeNull();
}
}
What makes this a good solution?
Several things:
Removing the dependency on UserManager from UsersController was inline with the DI model. Abstracting away the dependencies (therefore abstracting away implementation details like extension methods) and making them available not only to be mocked, but available to the entire IServiceCollection means that I only have 3 very simple steps when I need to implement another method for the user manager:
- Add the method signature to
IMYUserManager
- Override the method and call the base class implementation in
MYUserManager
- Mock new dependency inside of unit tests
I may revisit the scope of the service, I chose AddScoped() just to prove the concept, but performance and business requirements will choose whether or not that stays the same.
1
Good work reaching that conclusion. I did something similar stackoverflow.com/a/38673203/5233410 but I chose composition over inheritance to have more control over the exposed functionality.
– Nkosi
Nov 24 '18 at 13:14
add a comment |
I thought about the DI model and the dependencies of my controller. I only needed a handful of methods from UserManager, so I theorized about removing the dependency on UserManager from UsersController, and replacing it with some interface that implements the same signatures I needed from UserManager. Lets call that interface IMYUserManager:
public interface IMYUserManager
{
Task<IdentityUser> FindByIdAsync(string uniqueid);
Task<IdentityResult> CreateAsync(IdentityUser IdentityUser);
Task<IdentityResult> UpdateAsync(IdentityUser IdentityUser);
Task<IdentityResult> DeleteAsync(IdentityUser result);
}
Next, I needed to create a class that both is derived from UserManager and also implements IMYUserManager. The idea here is that implementing the methods from the interface will simply become overrides for the derived class, that way I get around FindByIdAsync (and the rest) being flagged as extension methods and requiring wrapping in a static class. Here is MyUserManager:
public class MYUserManager : UserManager<IdentityUser>, IMYUserManager
{
public MYUserManager(IUserStore<IdentityUser> store, IOptions<IdentityOptions> optionsAccessor,
IPasswordHasher<IdentityUser> passwordHasher, IEnumerable<IUserValidator<IdentityUser>> userValidators,
IEnumerable<IPasswordValidator<IdentityUser>> passwordValidators, ILookupNormalizer keyNormalizer,
IdentityErrorDescriber errors, IServiceProvider services, ILogger<UserManager<IdentityUser>> logger)
: base(store, optionsAccessor, passwordHasher, userValidators, passwordValidators, keyNormalizer, errors, services, logger)
{
}
public override Task<IdentityUser> FindByIdAsync(string userId)
{
return base.FindByIdAsync(userId);
}
//Removed other overridden methods for brevity; They also call the base class method
}
Almost home. Next, I naturally updated UsersController to use the IMYUserManager interface:
[Route("api/[controller]")]
[ApiController]
public class UsersController : ControllerBase
{
private ILogger<UsersController> _logger;
private readonly IMYUserManager _usermanager;
public UsersController(ILogger<UsersController> logger, IMYUserManager
usermanager)
{
_usermanager = usermanager;
_logger = logger;
}
}
And, naturally after that I have to make this dependency available to the service container for all who desire to feast upon:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddScoped<IMYUserManager, MYUserManager>();
services.AddMvc().SetCompatibilityVersion(CompatibilityVersion.Version_2_1);
}
And, finally, after verifying that actually builds, I updated the test class:
public class UsersControllerTests
{
public UsersController _usersController;
private Mock<IMYUserManager> _userManager;
public UsersControllerTests()
{
_userManager = new Mock<IMYUserManager>();
_usersController = new UsersController((new Mock<ILogger<UsersController>>
()).Object, _userManager.Object);
}
[Fact]
public async Task GetUser_ReturnsOkObjectResult_WhenModelStateIsValid()
{
//Setup
_userManager.Setup(x => x.FindByIdAsync("realuser"))
.Returns(Task.Run(() => new IdentityUser("realuser","realuser1")));
_usersController.ModelState.Clear();
//Test
ObjectResult response = await _usersController.GetUser("realuser");
//Assert
//Should receive 200 and user data content body
response.StatusCode.Should().Be((int)System.Net.HttpStatusCode.OK);
response.Value.Should().NotBeNull();
}
}
What makes this a good solution?
Several things:
Removing the dependency on UserManager from UsersController was inline with the DI model. Abstracting away the dependencies (therefore abstracting away implementation details like extension methods) and making them available not only to be mocked, but available to the entire IServiceCollection means that I only have 3 very simple steps when I need to implement another method for the user manager:
- Add the method signature to
IMYUserManager
- Override the method and call the base class implementation in
MYUserManager
- Mock new dependency inside of unit tests
I may revisit the scope of the service, I chose AddScoped() just to prove the concept, but performance and business requirements will choose whether or not that stays the same.
1
Good work reaching that conclusion. I did something similar stackoverflow.com/a/38673203/5233410 but I chose composition over inheritance to have more control over the exposed functionality.
– Nkosi
Nov 24 '18 at 13:14
add a comment |
I thought about the DI model and the dependencies of my controller. I only needed a handful of methods from UserManager, so I theorized about removing the dependency on UserManager from UsersController, and replacing it with some interface that implements the same signatures I needed from UserManager. Lets call that interface IMYUserManager:
public interface IMYUserManager
{
Task<IdentityUser> FindByIdAsync(string uniqueid);
Task<IdentityResult> CreateAsync(IdentityUser IdentityUser);
Task<IdentityResult> UpdateAsync(IdentityUser IdentityUser);
Task<IdentityResult> DeleteAsync(IdentityUser result);
}
Next, I needed to create a class that both is derived from UserManager and also implements IMYUserManager. The idea here is that implementing the methods from the interface will simply become overrides for the derived class, that way I get around FindByIdAsync (and the rest) being flagged as extension methods and requiring wrapping in a static class. Here is MyUserManager:
public class MYUserManager : UserManager<IdentityUser>, IMYUserManager
{
public MYUserManager(IUserStore<IdentityUser> store, IOptions<IdentityOptions> optionsAccessor,
IPasswordHasher<IdentityUser> passwordHasher, IEnumerable<IUserValidator<IdentityUser>> userValidators,
IEnumerable<IPasswordValidator<IdentityUser>> passwordValidators, ILookupNormalizer keyNormalizer,
IdentityErrorDescriber errors, IServiceProvider services, ILogger<UserManager<IdentityUser>> logger)
: base(store, optionsAccessor, passwordHasher, userValidators, passwordValidators, keyNormalizer, errors, services, logger)
{
}
public override Task<IdentityUser> FindByIdAsync(string userId)
{
return base.FindByIdAsync(userId);
}
//Removed other overridden methods for brevity; They also call the base class method
}
Almost home. Next, I naturally updated UsersController to use the IMYUserManager interface:
[Route("api/[controller]")]
[ApiController]
public class UsersController : ControllerBase
{
private ILogger<UsersController> _logger;
private readonly IMYUserManager _usermanager;
public UsersController(ILogger<UsersController> logger, IMYUserManager
usermanager)
{
_usermanager = usermanager;
_logger = logger;
}
}
And, naturally after that I have to make this dependency available to the service container for all who desire to feast upon:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddScoped<IMYUserManager, MYUserManager>();
services.AddMvc().SetCompatibilityVersion(CompatibilityVersion.Version_2_1);
}
And, finally, after verifying that actually builds, I updated the test class:
public class UsersControllerTests
{
public UsersController _usersController;
private Mock<IMYUserManager> _userManager;
public UsersControllerTests()
{
_userManager = new Mock<IMYUserManager>();
_usersController = new UsersController((new Mock<ILogger<UsersController>>
()).Object, _userManager.Object);
}
[Fact]
public async Task GetUser_ReturnsOkObjectResult_WhenModelStateIsValid()
{
//Setup
_userManager.Setup(x => x.FindByIdAsync("realuser"))
.Returns(Task.Run(() => new IdentityUser("realuser","realuser1")));
_usersController.ModelState.Clear();
//Test
ObjectResult response = await _usersController.GetUser("realuser");
//Assert
//Should receive 200 and user data content body
response.StatusCode.Should().Be((int)System.Net.HttpStatusCode.OK);
response.Value.Should().NotBeNull();
}
}
What makes this a good solution?
Several things:
Removing the dependency on UserManager from UsersController was inline with the DI model. Abstracting away the dependencies (therefore abstracting away implementation details like extension methods) and making them available not only to be mocked, but available to the entire IServiceCollection means that I only have 3 very simple steps when I need to implement another method for the user manager:
- Add the method signature to
IMYUserManager
- Override the method and call the base class implementation in
MYUserManager
- Mock new dependency inside of unit tests
I may revisit the scope of the service, I chose AddScoped() just to prove the concept, but performance and business requirements will choose whether or not that stays the same.
I thought about the DI model and the dependencies of my controller. I only needed a handful of methods from UserManager, so I theorized about removing the dependency on UserManager from UsersController, and replacing it with some interface that implements the same signatures I needed from UserManager. Lets call that interface IMYUserManager:
public interface IMYUserManager
{
Task<IdentityUser> FindByIdAsync(string uniqueid);
Task<IdentityResult> CreateAsync(IdentityUser IdentityUser);
Task<IdentityResult> UpdateAsync(IdentityUser IdentityUser);
Task<IdentityResult> DeleteAsync(IdentityUser result);
}
Next, I needed to create a class that both is derived from UserManager and also implements IMYUserManager. The idea here is that implementing the methods from the interface will simply become overrides for the derived class, that way I get around FindByIdAsync (and the rest) being flagged as extension methods and requiring wrapping in a static class. Here is MyUserManager:
public class MYUserManager : UserManager<IdentityUser>, IMYUserManager
{
public MYUserManager(IUserStore<IdentityUser> store, IOptions<IdentityOptions> optionsAccessor,
IPasswordHasher<IdentityUser> passwordHasher, IEnumerable<IUserValidator<IdentityUser>> userValidators,
IEnumerable<IPasswordValidator<IdentityUser>> passwordValidators, ILookupNormalizer keyNormalizer,
IdentityErrorDescriber errors, IServiceProvider services, ILogger<UserManager<IdentityUser>> logger)
: base(store, optionsAccessor, passwordHasher, userValidators, passwordValidators, keyNormalizer, errors, services, logger)
{
}
public override Task<IdentityUser> FindByIdAsync(string userId)
{
return base.FindByIdAsync(userId);
}
//Removed other overridden methods for brevity; They also call the base class method
}
Almost home. Next, I naturally updated UsersController to use the IMYUserManager interface:
[Route("api/[controller]")]
[ApiController]
public class UsersController : ControllerBase
{
private ILogger<UsersController> _logger;
private readonly IMYUserManager _usermanager;
public UsersController(ILogger<UsersController> logger, IMYUserManager
usermanager)
{
_usermanager = usermanager;
_logger = logger;
}
}
And, naturally after that I have to make this dependency available to the service container for all who desire to feast upon:
public void ConfigureServices(IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddScoped<IMYUserManager, MYUserManager>();
services.AddMvc().SetCompatibilityVersion(CompatibilityVersion.Version_2_1);
}
And, finally, after verifying that actually builds, I updated the test class:
public class UsersControllerTests
{
public UsersController _usersController;
private Mock<IMYUserManager> _userManager;
public UsersControllerTests()
{
_userManager = new Mock<IMYUserManager>();
_usersController = new UsersController((new Mock<ILogger<UsersController>>
()).Object, _userManager.Object);
}
[Fact]
public async Task GetUser_ReturnsOkObjectResult_WhenModelStateIsValid()
{
//Setup
_userManager.Setup(x => x.FindByIdAsync("realuser"))
.Returns(Task.Run(() => new IdentityUser("realuser","realuser1")));
_usersController.ModelState.Clear();
//Test
ObjectResult response = await _usersController.GetUser("realuser");
//Assert
//Should receive 200 and user data content body
response.StatusCode.Should().Be((int)System.Net.HttpStatusCode.OK);
response.Value.Should().NotBeNull();
}
}
What makes this a good solution?
Several things:
Removing the dependency on UserManager from UsersController was inline with the DI model. Abstracting away the dependencies (therefore abstracting away implementation details like extension methods) and making them available not only to be mocked, but available to the entire IServiceCollection means that I only have 3 very simple steps when I need to implement another method for the user manager:
- Add the method signature to
IMYUserManager
- Override the method and call the base class implementation in
MYUserManager
- Mock new dependency inside of unit tests
I may revisit the scope of the service, I chose AddScoped() just to prove the concept, but performance and business requirements will choose whether or not that stays the same.
answered Nov 24 '18 at 13:05
MDMoore313MDMoore313
1,8811326
1,8811326
1
Good work reaching that conclusion. I did something similar stackoverflow.com/a/38673203/5233410 but I chose composition over inheritance to have more control over the exposed functionality.
– Nkosi
Nov 24 '18 at 13:14
add a comment |
1
Good work reaching that conclusion. I did something similar stackoverflow.com/a/38673203/5233410 but I chose composition over inheritance to have more control over the exposed functionality.
– Nkosi
Nov 24 '18 at 13:14
1
1
Good work reaching that conclusion. I did something similar stackoverflow.com/a/38673203/5233410 but I chose composition over inheritance to have more control over the exposed functionality.
– Nkosi
Nov 24 '18 at 13:14
Good work reaching that conclusion. I did something similar stackoverflow.com/a/38673203/5233410 but I chose composition over inheritance to have more control over the exposed functionality.
– Nkosi
Nov 24 '18 at 13:14
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53453232%2fbest-practice-for-unit-testing-a-controller-that-depends-on-usermanagertuser%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
docs.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/mvc/controllers/…
– MDMoore313
Nov 23 '18 at 22:33