incubator-ambari-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From maha...@apache.org
Subject svn commit: r1435472 [2/3] - in /incubator/ambari/trunk: ./ ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/ ambari-server/src/main/python/ ambari-server/src/test/python/
Date Sat, 19 Jan 2013 02:33:01 GMT
Added: incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/examples.txt
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/examples.txt?rev=1435472&view=auto
==============================================================================
--- incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/examples.txt (added)
+++ incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/examples.txt Sat Jan 19 02:33:01 2013
@@ -0,0 +1,1063 @@
+.. _further-examples:
+
+==================
+ Further Examples
+==================
+
+.. currentmodule:: mock
+
+.. testsetup::
+
+    from datetime import date
+
+    BackendProvider = Mock()
+    sys.modules['mymodule'] = mymodule = Mock(name='mymodule')
+
+    def grob(val):
+        "First frob and then clear val"
+        mymodule.frob(val)
+        val.clear()
+
+    mymodule.frob = lambda val: val
+    mymodule.grob = grob
+    mymodule.date = date
+
+    class TestCase(unittest2.TestCase):
+        def run(self):
+            result = unittest2.TestResult()
+            out = unittest2.TestCase.run(self, result)
+            assert result.wasSuccessful()
+
+    from mock import inPy3k
+
+
+
+For comprehensive examples, see the unit tests included in the full source
+distribution.
+
+Here are some more examples for some slightly more advanced scenarios than in
+the :ref:`getting started <getting-started>` guide.
+
+
+Mocking chained calls
+=====================
+
+Mocking chained calls is actually straightforward with mock once you
+understand the :attr:`~Mock.return_value` attribute. When a mock is called for
+the first time, or you fetch its `return_value` before it has been called, a
+new `Mock` is created.
+
+This means that you can see how the object returned from a call to a mocked
+object has been used by interrogating the `return_value` mock:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock()
+    >>> mock().foo(a=2, b=3)
+    <Mock name='mock().foo()' id='...'>
+    >>> mock.return_value.foo.assert_called_with(a=2, b=3)
+
+From here it is a simple step to configure and then make assertions about
+chained calls. Of course another alternative is writing your code in a more
+testable way in the first place...
+
+So, suppose we have some code that looks a little bit like this:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class Something(object):
+    ...     def __init__(self):
+    ...         self.backend = BackendProvider()
+    ...     def method(self):
+    ...         response = self.backend.get_endpoint('foobar').create_call('spam', 'eggs').start_call()
+    ...         # more code
+
+Assuming that `BackendProvider` is already well tested, how do we test
+`method()`? Specifically, we want to test that the code section `# more
+code` uses the response object in the correct way.
+
+As this chain of calls is made from an instance attribute we can monkey patch
+the `backend` attribute on a `Something` instance. In this particular case
+we are only interested in the return value from the final call to
+`start_call` so we don't have much configuration to do. Let's assume the
+object it returns is 'file-like', so we'll ensure that our response object
+uses the builtin `file` as its `spec`.
+
+To do this we create a mock instance as our mock backend and create a mock
+response object for it. To set the response as the return value for that final
+`start_call` we could do this:
+
+    `mock_backend.get_endpoint.return_value.create_call.return_value.start_call.return_value = mock_response`.
+
+We can do that in a slightly nicer way using the :meth:`~Mock.configure_mock`
+method to directly set the return value for us:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> something = Something()
+    >>> mock_response = Mock(spec=file)
+    >>> mock_backend = Mock()
+    >>> config = {'get_endpoint.return_value.create_call.return_value.start_call.return_value': mock_response}
+    >>> mock_backend.configure_mock(**config)
+
+With these we monkey patch the "mock backend" in place and can make the real
+call:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> something.backend = mock_backend
+    >>> something.method()
+
+Using :attr:`~Mock.mock_calls` we can check the chained call with a single
+assert. A chained call is several calls in one line of code, so there will be
+several entries in `mock_calls`. We can use :meth:`call.call_list` to create
+this list of calls for us:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> chained = call.get_endpoint('foobar').create_call('spam', 'eggs').start_call()
+    >>> call_list = chained.call_list()
+    >>> assert mock_backend.mock_calls == call_list
+
+
+Partial mocking
+===============
+
+In some tests I wanted to mock out a call to `datetime.date.today()
+<http://docs.python.org/library/datetime.html#datetime.date.today>`_ to return
+a known date, but I didn't want to prevent the code under test from
+creating new date objects. Unfortunately `datetime.date` is written in C, and
+so I couldn't just monkey-patch out the static `date.today` method.
+
+I found a simple way of doing this that involved effectively wrapping the date
+class with a mock, but passing through calls to the constructor to the real
+class (and returning real instances).
+
+The :func:`patch decorator <patch>` is used here to
+mock out the `date` class in the module under test. The :attr:`side_effect`
+attribute on the mock date class is then set to a lambda function that returns
+a real date. When the mock date class is called a real date will be
+constructed and returned by `side_effect`.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> from datetime import date
+    >>> with patch('mymodule.date') as mock_date:
+    ...     mock_date.today.return_value = date(2010, 10, 8)
+    ...     mock_date.side_effect = lambda *args, **kw: date(*args, **kw)
+    ...
+    ...     assert mymodule.date.today() == date(2010, 10, 8)
+    ...     assert mymodule.date(2009, 6, 8) == date(2009, 6, 8)
+    ...
+
+Note that we don't patch `datetime.date` globally, we patch `date` in the
+module that *uses* it. See :ref:`where to patch <where-to-patch>`.
+
+When `date.today()` is called a known date is returned, but calls to the
+`date(...)` constructor still return normal dates. Without this you can find
+yourself having to calculate an expected result using exactly the same
+algorithm as the code under test, which is a classic testing anti-pattern.
+
+Calls to the date constructor are recorded in the `mock_date` attributes
+(`call_count` and friends) which may also be useful for your tests.
+
+An alternative way of dealing with mocking dates, or other builtin classes,
+is discussed in `this blog entry
+<http://williamjohnbert.com/2011/07/how-to-unit-testing-in-django-with-mocking-and-patching/>`_.
+
+
+Mocking a Generator Method
+==========================
+
+A Python generator is a function or method that uses the `yield statement
+<http://docs.python.org/reference/simple_stmts.html#the-yield-statement>`_ to
+return a series of values when iterated over [#]_.
+
+A generator method / function is called to return the generator object. It is
+the generator object that is then iterated over. The protocol method for
+iteration is `__iter__
+<http://docs.python.org/library/stdtypes.html#container.__iter__>`_, so we can
+mock this using a `MagicMock`.
+
+Here's an example class with an "iter" method implemented as a generator:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class Foo(object):
+    ...     def iter(self):
+    ...         for i in [1, 2, 3]:
+    ...             yield i
+    ...
+    >>> foo = Foo()
+    >>> list(foo.iter())
+    [1, 2, 3]
+
+
+How would we mock this class, and in particular its "iter" method?
+
+To configure the values returned from the iteration (implicit in the call to
+`list`), we need to configure the object returned by the call to `foo.iter()`.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock_foo = MagicMock()
+    >>> mock_foo.iter.return_value = iter([1, 2, 3])
+    >>> list(mock_foo.iter())
+    [1, 2, 3]
+
+.. [#] There are also generator expressions and more `advanced uses
+    <http://www.dabeaz.com/coroutines/index.html>`_ of generators, but we aren't
+    concerned about them here. A very good introduction to generators and how
+    powerful they are is: `Generator Tricks for Systems Programmers
+    <http://www.dabeaz.com/generators/>`_.
+
+
+Applying the same patch to every test method
+============================================
+
+If you want several patches in place for multiple test methods the obvious way
+is to apply the patch decorators to every method. This can feel like unnecessary
+repetition. For Python 2.6 or more recent you can use `patch` (in all its
+various forms) as a class decorator. This applies the patches to all test
+methods on the class. A test method is identified by methods whose names start
+with `test`:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> @patch('mymodule.SomeClass')
+    ... class MyTest(TestCase):
+    ...
+    ...     def test_one(self, MockSomeClass):
+    ...         self.assertTrue(mymodule.SomeClass is MockSomeClass)
+    ...
+    ...     def test_two(self, MockSomeClass):
+    ...         self.assertTrue(mymodule.SomeClass is MockSomeClass)
+    ...
+    ...     def not_a_test(self):
+    ...         return 'something'
+    ...
+    >>> MyTest('test_one').test_one()
+    >>> MyTest('test_two').test_two()
+    >>> MyTest('test_two').not_a_test()
+    'something'
+
+An alternative way of managing patches is to use the :ref:`start-and-stop`.
+These allow you to move the patching into your `setUp` and `tearDown` methods.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class MyTest(TestCase):
+    ...     def setUp(self):
+    ...         self.patcher = patch('mymodule.foo')
+    ...         self.mock_foo = self.patcher.start()
+    ...
+    ...     def test_foo(self):
+    ...         self.assertTrue(mymodule.foo is self.mock_foo)
+    ...
+    ...     def tearDown(self):
+    ...         self.patcher.stop()
+    ...
+    >>> MyTest('test_foo').run()
+
+If you use this technique you must ensure that the patching is "undone" by
+calling `stop`. This can be fiddlier than you might think, because if an
+exception is raised in the setUp then tearDown is not called. `unittest2
+<http://pypi.python.org/pypi/unittest2>`_ cleanup functions make this simpler:
+
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class MyTest(TestCase):
+    ...     def setUp(self):
+    ...         patcher = patch('mymodule.foo')
+    ...         self.addCleanup(patcher.stop)
+    ...         self.mock_foo = patcher.start()
+    ...
+    ...     def test_foo(self):
+    ...         self.assertTrue(mymodule.foo is self.mock_foo)
+    ...
+    >>> MyTest('test_foo').run()
+
+
+Mocking Unbound Methods
+=======================
+
+Whilst writing tests today I needed to patch an *unbound method* (patching the
+method on the class rather than on the instance). I needed self to be passed
+in as the first argument because I want to make asserts about which objects
+were calling this particular method. The issue is that you can't patch with a
+mock for this, because if you replace an unbound method with a mock it doesn't
+become a bound method when fetched from the instance, and so it doesn't get
+self passed in. The workaround is to patch the unbound method with a real
+function instead. The :func:`patch` decorator makes it so simple to
+patch out methods with a mock that having to create a real function becomes a
+nuisance.
+
+If you pass `autospec=True` to patch then it does the patching with a
+*real* function object. This function object has the same signature as the one
+it is replacing, but delegates to a mock under the hood. You still get your
+mock auto-created in exactly the same way as before. What it means though, is
+that if you use it to patch out an unbound method on a class the mocked
+function will be turned into a bound method if it is fetched from an instance.
+It will have `self` passed in as the first argument, which is exactly what I
+wanted:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class Foo(object):
+    ...   def foo(self):
+    ...     pass
+    ...
+    >>> with patch.object(Foo, 'foo', autospec=True) as mock_foo:
+    ...   mock_foo.return_value = 'foo'
+    ...   foo = Foo()
+    ...   foo.foo()
+    ...
+    'foo'
+    >>> mock_foo.assert_called_once_with(foo)
+
+If we don't use `autospec=True` then the unbound method is patched out
+with a Mock instance instead, and isn't called with `self`.
+
+
+Checking multiple calls with mock
+=================================
+
+mock has a nice API for making assertions about how your mock objects are used.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock()
+    >>> mock.foo_bar.return_value = None
+    >>> mock.foo_bar('baz', spam='eggs')
+    >>> mock.foo_bar.assert_called_with('baz', spam='eggs')
+
+If your mock is only being called once you can use the
+:meth:`assert_called_once_with` method that also asserts that the
+:attr:`call_count` is one.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock.foo_bar.assert_called_once_with('baz', spam='eggs')
+    >>> mock.foo_bar()
+    >>> mock.foo_bar.assert_called_once_with('baz', spam='eggs')
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+        ...
+    AssertionError: Expected to be called once. Called 2 times.
+
+Both `assert_called_with` and `assert_called_once_with` make assertions about
+the *most recent* call. If your mock is going to be called several times, and
+you want to make assertions about *all* those calls you can use
+:attr:`~Mock.call_args_list`:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock(return_value=None)
+    >>> mock(1, 2, 3)
+    >>> mock(4, 5, 6)
+    >>> mock()
+    >>> mock.call_args_list
+    [call(1, 2, 3), call(4, 5, 6), call()]
+
+The :data:`call` helper makes it easy to make assertions about these calls. You
+can build up a list of expected calls and compare it to `call_args_list`. This
+looks remarkably similar to the repr of the `call_args_list`:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> expected = [call(1, 2, 3), call(4, 5, 6), call()]
+    >>> mock.call_args_list == expected
+    True
+
+
+Coping with mutable arguments
+=============================
+
+Another situation is rare, but can bite you, is when your mock is called with
+mutable arguments. `call_args` and `call_args_list` store *references* to the
+arguments. If the arguments are mutated by the code under test then you can no
+longer make assertions about what the values were when the mock was called.
+
+Here's some example code that shows the problem. Imagine the following functions
+defined in 'mymodule'::
+
+    def frob(val):
+        pass
+
+    def grob(val):
+        "First frob and then clear val"
+        frob(val)
+        val.clear()
+
+When we try to test that `grob` calls `frob` with the correct argument look
+what happens:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> with patch('mymodule.frob') as mock_frob:
+    ...     val = set([6])
+    ...     mymodule.grob(val)
+    ...
+    >>> val
+    set([])
+    >>> mock_frob.assert_called_with(set([6]))
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+        ...
+    AssertionError: Expected: ((set([6]),), {})
+    Called with: ((set([]),), {})
+
+One possibility would be for mock to copy the arguments you pass in. This
+could then cause problems if you do assertions that rely on object identity
+for equality.
+
+Here's one solution that uses the :attr:`side_effect`
+functionality. If you provide a `side_effect` function for a mock then
+`side_effect` will be called with the same args as the mock. This gives us an
+opportunity to copy the arguments and store them for later assertions. In this
+example I'm using *another* mock to store the arguments so that I can use the
+mock methods for doing the assertion. Again a helper function sets this up for
+me.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> from copy import deepcopy
+    >>> from mock import Mock, patch, DEFAULT
+    >>> def copy_call_args(mock):
+    ...     new_mock = Mock()
+    ...     def side_effect(*args, **kwargs):
+    ...         args = deepcopy(args)
+    ...         kwargs = deepcopy(kwargs)
+    ...         new_mock(*args, **kwargs)
+    ...         return DEFAULT
+    ...     mock.side_effect = side_effect
+    ...     return new_mock
+    ...
+    >>> with patch('mymodule.frob') as mock_frob:
+    ...     new_mock = copy_call_args(mock_frob)
+    ...     val = set([6])
+    ...     mymodule.grob(val)
+    ...
+    >>> new_mock.assert_called_with(set([6]))
+    >>> new_mock.call_args
+    call(set([6]))
+
+`copy_call_args` is called with the mock that will be called. It returns a new
+mock that we do the assertion on. The `side_effect` function makes a copy of
+the args and calls our `new_mock` with the copy.
+
+.. note::
+
+    If your mock is only going to be used once there is an easier way of
+    checking arguments at the point they are called. You can simply do the
+    checking inside a `side_effect` function.
+
+    .. doctest::
+
+        >>> def side_effect(arg):
+        ...     assert arg == set([6])
+        ...
+        >>> mock = Mock(side_effect=side_effect)
+        >>> mock(set([6]))
+        >>> mock(set())
+        Traceback (most recent call last):
+            ...
+        AssertionError
+
+An alternative approach is to create a subclass of `Mock` or `MagicMock` that
+copies (using `copy.deepcopy
+<http://docs.python.org/library/copy.html#copy.deepcopy>`_) the arguments.
+Here's an example implementation:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> from copy import deepcopy
+    >>> class CopyingMock(MagicMock):
+    ...     def __call__(self, *args, **kwargs):
+    ...         args = deepcopy(args)
+    ...         kwargs = deepcopy(kwargs)
+    ...         return super(CopyingMock, self).__call__(*args, **kwargs)
+    ...
+    >>> c = CopyingMock(return_value=None)
+    >>> arg = set()
+    >>> c(arg)
+    >>> arg.add(1)
+    >>> c.assert_called_with(set())
+    >>> c.assert_called_with(arg)
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+        ...
+    AssertionError: Expected call: mock(set([1]))
+    Actual call: mock(set([]))
+    >>> c.foo
+    <CopyingMock name='mock.foo' id='...'>
+
+When you subclass `Mock` or `MagicMock` all dynamically created attributes,
+and the `return_value` will use your subclass automatically. That means all
+children of a `CopyingMock` will also have the type `CopyingMock`.
+
+
+Raising exceptions on attribute access
+======================================
+
+You can use :class:`PropertyMock` to mimic the behaviour of properties. This
+includes raising exceptions when an attribute is accessed.
+
+Here's an example raising a `ValueError` when the 'foo' attribute is accessed:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> m = MagicMock()
+    >>> p = PropertyMock(side_effect=ValueError)
+    >>> type(m).foo = p
+    >>> m.foo
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+    ....
+    ValueError
+
+Because every mock object has its own type, a new subclass of whichever mock
+class you're using, all mock objects are isolated from each other. You can
+safely attach properties (or other descriptors or whatever you want in fact)
+to `type(mock)` without affecting other mock objects.
+
+
+Multiple calls with different effects
+=====================================
+
+.. note::
+
+    In mock 1.0 the handling of iterable `side_effect` was changed. Any
+    exceptions in the iterable will be raised instead of returned.
+
+Handling code that needs to behave differently on subsequent calls during the
+test can be tricky. For example you may have a function that needs to raise
+an exception the first time it is called but returns a response on the second
+call (testing retry behaviour).
+
+One approach is to use a :attr:`side_effect` function that replaces itself. The
+first time it is called the `side_effect` sets a new `side_effect` that will
+be used for the second call. It then raises an exception:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> def side_effect(*args):
+    ...   def second_call(*args):
+    ...     return 'response'
+    ...   mock.side_effect = second_call
+    ...   raise Exception('boom')
+    ...
+    >>> mock = Mock(side_effect=side_effect)
+    >>> mock('first')
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+        ...
+    Exception: boom
+    >>> mock('second')
+    'response'
+    >>> mock.assert_called_with('second')
+
+Another perfectly valid way would be to pop return values from a list. If the
+return value is an exception, raise it instead of returning it:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> returns = [Exception('boom'), 'response']
+    >>> def side_effect(*args):
+    ...   result = returns.pop(0)
+    ...   if isinstance(result, Exception):
+    ...     raise result
+    ...   return result
+    ...
+    >>> mock = Mock(side_effect=side_effect)
+    >>> mock('first')
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+        ...
+    Exception: boom
+    >>> mock('second')
+    'response'
+    >>> mock.assert_called_with('second')
+
+Which approach you prefer is a matter of taste. The first approach is actually
+a line shorter but maybe the second approach is more readable.
+
+
+Nesting Patches
+===============
+
+Using patch as a context manager is nice, but if you do multiple patches you
+can end up with nested with statements indenting further and further to the
+right:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class MyTest(TestCase):
+    ...
+    ...     def test_foo(self):
+    ...         with patch('mymodule.Foo') as mock_foo:
+    ...             with patch('mymodule.Bar') as mock_bar:
+    ...                 with patch('mymodule.Spam') as mock_spam:
+    ...                     assert mymodule.Foo is mock_foo
+    ...                     assert mymodule.Bar is mock_bar
+    ...                     assert mymodule.Spam is mock_spam
+    ...
+    >>> original = mymodule.Foo
+    >>> MyTest('test_foo').test_foo()
+    >>> assert mymodule.Foo is original
+
+With unittest2_ `cleanup` functions and the :ref:`start-and-stop` we can
+achieve the same effect without the nested indentation. A simple helper
+method, `create_patch`, puts the patch in place and returns the created mock
+for us:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class MyTest(TestCase):
+    ...
+    ...     def create_patch(self, name):
+    ...         patcher = patch(name)
+    ...         thing = patcher.start()
+    ...         self.addCleanup(patcher.stop)
+    ...         return thing
+    ...
+    ...     def test_foo(self):
+    ...         mock_foo = self.create_patch('mymodule.Foo')
+    ...         mock_bar = self.create_patch('mymodule.Bar')
+    ...         mock_spam = self.create_patch('mymodule.Spam')
+    ...
+    ...         assert mymodule.Foo is mock_foo
+    ...         assert mymodule.Bar is mock_bar
+    ...         assert mymodule.Spam is mock_spam
+    ...
+    >>> original = mymodule.Foo
+    >>> MyTest('test_foo').run()
+    >>> assert mymodule.Foo is original
+
+
+Mocking a dictionary with MagicMock
+===================================
+
+You may want to mock a dictionary, or other container object, recording all
+access to it whilst having it still behave like a dictionary.
+
+We can do this with :class:`MagicMock`, which will behave like a dictionary,
+and using :data:`~Mock.side_effect` to delegate dictionary access to a real
+underlying dictionary that is under our control.
+
+When the `__getitem__` and `__setitem__` methods of our `MagicMock` are called
+(normal dictionary access) then `side_effect` is called with the key (and in
+the case of `__setitem__` the value too). We can also control what is returned.
+
+After the `MagicMock` has been used we can use attributes like
+:data:`~Mock.call_args_list` to assert about how the dictionary was used:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> my_dict = {'a': 1, 'b': 2, 'c': 3}
+    >>> def getitem(name):
+    ...      return my_dict[name]
+    ...
+    >>> def setitem(name, val):
+    ...     my_dict[name] = val
+    ...
+    >>> mock = MagicMock()
+    >>> mock.__getitem__.side_effect = getitem
+    >>> mock.__setitem__.side_effect = setitem
+
+.. note::
+
+    An alternative to using `MagicMock` is to use `Mock` and *only* provide
+    the magic methods you specifically want:
+
+    .. doctest::
+
+        >>> mock = Mock()
+        >>> mock.__setitem__ = Mock(side_effect=getitem)
+        >>> mock.__getitem__ = Mock(side_effect=setitem)
+
+    A *third* option is to use `MagicMock` but passing in `dict` as the `spec`
+    (or `spec_set`) argument so that the `MagicMock` created only has
+    dictionary magic methods available:
+
+    .. doctest::
+
+        >>> mock = MagicMock(spec_set=dict)
+        >>> mock.__getitem__.side_effect = getitem
+        >>> mock.__setitem__.side_effect = setitem
+
+With these side effect functions in place, the `mock` will behave like a normal
+dictionary but recording the access. It even raises a `KeyError` if you try
+to access a key that doesn't exist.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock['a']
+    1
+    >>> mock['c']
+    3
+    >>> mock['d']
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+        ...
+    KeyError: 'd'
+    >>> mock['b'] = 'fish'
+    >>> mock['d'] = 'eggs'
+    >>> mock['b']
+    'fish'
+    >>> mock['d']
+    'eggs'
+
+After it has been used you can make assertions about the access using the normal
+mock methods and attributes:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock.__getitem__.call_args_list
+    [call('a'), call('c'), call('d'), call('b'), call('d')]
+    >>> mock.__setitem__.call_args_list
+    [call('b', 'fish'), call('d', 'eggs')]
+    >>> my_dict
+    {'a': 1, 'c': 3, 'b': 'fish', 'd': 'eggs'}
+
+
+Mock subclasses and their attributes
+====================================
+
+There are various reasons why you might want to subclass `Mock`. One reason
+might be to add helper methods. Here's a silly example:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class MyMock(MagicMock):
+    ...     def has_been_called(self):
+    ...         return self.called
+    ...
+    >>> mymock = MyMock(return_value=None)
+    >>> mymock
+    <MyMock id='...'>
+    >>> mymock.has_been_called()
+    False
+    >>> mymock()
+    >>> mymock.has_been_called()
+    True
+
+The standard behaviour for `Mock` instances is that attributes and the return
+value mocks are of the same type as the mock they are accessed on. This ensures
+that `Mock` attributes are `Mocks` and `MagicMock` attributes are `MagicMocks`
+[#]_. So if you're subclassing to add helper methods then they'll also be
+available on the attributes and return value mock of instances of your
+subclass.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mymock.foo
+    <MyMock name='mock.foo' id='...'>
+    >>> mymock.foo.has_been_called()
+    False
+    >>> mymock.foo()
+    <MyMock name='mock.foo()' id='...'>
+    >>> mymock.foo.has_been_called()
+    True
+
+Sometimes this is inconvenient. For example, `one user
+<https://code.google.com/p/mock/issues/detail?id=105>`_ is subclassing mock to
+created a `Twisted adaptor
+<http://twistedmatrix.com/documents/11.0.0/api/twisted.python.components.html>`_.
+Having this applied to attributes too actually causes errors.
+
+`Mock` (in all its flavours) uses a method called `_get_child_mock` to create
+these "sub-mocks" for attributes and return values. You can prevent your
+subclass being used for attributes by overriding this method. The signature is
+that it takes arbitrary keyword arguments (`**kwargs`) which are then passed
+onto the mock constructor:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class Subclass(MagicMock):
+    ...     def _get_child_mock(self, **kwargs):
+    ...         return MagicMock(**kwargs)
+    ...
+    >>> mymock = Subclass()
+    >>> mymock.foo
+    <MagicMock name='mock.foo' id='...'>
+    >>> assert isinstance(mymock, Subclass)
+    >>> assert not isinstance(mymock.foo, Subclass)
+    >>> assert not isinstance(mymock(), Subclass)
+
+.. [#] An exception to this rule are the non-callable mocks. Attributes use the
+    callable variant because otherwise non-callable mocks couldn't have callable
+    methods.
+
+
+Mocking imports with patch.dict
+===============================
+
+One situation where mocking can be hard is where you have a local import inside
+a function. These are harder to mock because they aren't using an object from
+the module namespace that we can patch out.
+
+Generally local imports are to be avoided. They are sometimes done to prevent
+circular dependencies, for which there is *usually* a much better way to solve
+the problem (refactor the code) or to prevent "up front costs" by delaying the
+import. This can also be solved in better ways than an unconditional local
+import (store the module as a class or module attribute and only do the import
+on first use).
+
+That aside there is a way to use `mock` to affect the results of an import.
+Importing fetches an *object* from the `sys.modules` dictionary. Note that it
+fetches an *object*, which need not be a module. Importing a module for the
+first time results in a module object being put in `sys.modules`, so usually
+when you import something you get a module back. This need not be the case
+however.
+
+This means you can use :func:`patch.dict` to *temporarily* put a mock in place
+in `sys.modules`. Any imports whilst this patch is active will fetch the mock.
+When the patch is complete (the decorated function exits, the with statement
+body is complete or `patcher.stop()` is called) then whatever was there
+previously will be restored safely.
+
+Here's an example that mocks out the 'fooble' module.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock()
+    >>> with patch.dict('sys.modules', {'fooble': mock}):
+    ...    import fooble
+    ...    fooble.blob()
+    ...
+    <Mock name='mock.blob()' id='...'>
+    >>> assert 'fooble' not in sys.modules
+    >>> mock.blob.assert_called_once_with()
+
+As you can see the `import fooble` succeeds, but on exit there is no 'fooble'
+left in `sys.modules`.
+
+This also works for the `from module import name` form:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock()
+    >>> with patch.dict('sys.modules', {'fooble': mock}):
+    ...    from fooble import blob
+    ...    blob.blip()
+    ...
+    <Mock name='mock.blob.blip()' id='...'>
+    >>> mock.blob.blip.assert_called_once_with()
+
+With slightly more work you can also mock package imports:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock()
+    >>> modules = {'package': mock, 'package.module': mock.module}
+    >>> with patch.dict('sys.modules', modules):
+    ...    from package.module import fooble
+    ...    fooble()
+    ...
+    <Mock name='mock.module.fooble()' id='...'>
+    >>> mock.module.fooble.assert_called_once_with()
+
+
+Tracking order of calls and less verbose call assertions
+========================================================
+
+The :class:`Mock` class allows you to track the *order* of method calls on
+your mock objects through the :attr:`~Mock.method_calls` attribute. This
+doesn't allow you to track the order of calls between separate mock objects,
+however we can use :attr:`~Mock.mock_calls` to achieve the same effect.
+
+Because mocks track calls to child mocks in `mock_calls`, and accessing an
+arbitrary attribute of a mock creates a child mock, we can create our separate
+mocks from a parent one. Calls to those child mock will then all be recorded,
+in order, in the `mock_calls` of the parent:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> manager = Mock()
+    >>> mock_foo = manager.foo
+    >>> mock_bar = manager.bar
+
+    >>> mock_foo.something()
+    <Mock name='mock.foo.something()' id='...'>
+    >>> mock_bar.other.thing()
+    <Mock name='mock.bar.other.thing()' id='...'>
+
+    >>> manager.mock_calls
+    [call.foo.something(), call.bar.other.thing()]
+
+We can then assert about the calls, including the order, by comparing with
+the `mock_calls` attribute on the manager mock:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> expected_calls = [call.foo.something(), call.bar.other.thing()]
+    >>> manager.mock_calls == expected_calls
+    True
+
+If `patch` is creating, and putting in place, your mocks then you can attach
+them to a manager mock using the :meth:`~Mock.attach_mock` method. After
+attaching calls will be recorded in `mock_calls` of the manager.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> manager = MagicMock()
+    >>> with patch('mymodule.Class1') as MockClass1:
+    ...     with patch('mymodule.Class2') as MockClass2:
+    ...         manager.attach_mock(MockClass1, 'MockClass1')
+    ...         manager.attach_mock(MockClass2, 'MockClass2')
+    ...         MockClass1().foo()
+    ...         MockClass2().bar()
+    ...
+    <MagicMock name='mock.MockClass1().foo()' id='...'>
+    <MagicMock name='mock.MockClass2().bar()' id='...'>
+    >>> manager.mock_calls
+    [call.MockClass1(),
+     call.MockClass1().foo(),
+     call.MockClass2(),
+     call.MockClass2().bar()]
+
+If many calls have been made, but you're only interested in a particular
+sequence of them then an alternative is to use the
+:meth:`~Mock.assert_has_calls` method. This takes a list of calls (constructed
+with the :data:`call` object). If that sequence of calls are in
+:attr:`~Mock.mock_calls` then the assert succeeds.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> m = MagicMock()
+    >>> m().foo().bar().baz()
+    <MagicMock name='mock().foo().bar().baz()' id='...'>
+    >>> m.one().two().three()
+    <MagicMock name='mock.one().two().three()' id='...'>
+    >>> calls = call.one().two().three().call_list()
+    >>> m.assert_has_calls(calls)
+
+Even though the chained call `m.one().two().three()` aren't the only calls that
+have been made to the mock, the assert still succeeds.
+
+Sometimes a mock may have several calls made to it, and you are only interested
+in asserting about *some* of those calls. You may not even care about the
+order. In this case you can pass `any_order=True` to `assert_has_calls`:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> m = MagicMock()
+    >>> m(1), m.two(2, 3), m.seven(7), m.fifty('50')
+    (...)
+    >>> calls = [call.fifty('50'), call(1), call.seven(7)]
+    >>> m.assert_has_calls(calls, any_order=True)
+
+
+More complex argument matching
+==============================
+
+Using the same basic concept as `ANY` we can implement matchers to do more
+complex assertions on objects used as arguments to mocks.
+
+Suppose we expect some object to be passed to a mock that by default
+compares equal based on object identity (which is the Python default for user
+defined classes). To use :meth:`~Mock.assert_called_with` we would need to pass
+in the exact same object. If we are only interested in some of the attributes
+of this object then we can create a matcher that will check these attributes
+for us.
+
+You can see in this example how a 'standard' call to `assert_called_with` isn't
+sufficient:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class Foo(object):
+    ...     def __init__(self, a, b):
+    ...         self.a, self.b = a, b
+    ...
+    >>> mock = Mock(return_value=None)
+    >>> mock(Foo(1, 2))
+    >>> mock.assert_called_with(Foo(1, 2))
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+        ...
+    AssertionError: Expected: call(<__main__.Foo object at 0x...>)
+    Actual call: call(<__main__.Foo object at 0x...>)
+
+A comparison function for our `Foo` class might look something like this:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> def compare(self, other):
+    ...     if not type(self) == type(other):
+    ...         return False
+    ...     if self.a != other.a:
+    ...         return False
+    ...     if self.b != other.b:
+    ...         return False
+    ...     return True
+    ...
+
+And a matcher object that can use comparison functions like this for its
+equality operation would look something like this:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class Matcher(object):
+    ...     def __init__(self, compare, some_obj):
+    ...         self.compare = compare
+    ...         self.some_obj = some_obj
+    ...     def __eq__(self, other):
+    ...         return self.compare(self.some_obj, other)
+    ...
+
+Putting all this together:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> match_foo = Matcher(compare, Foo(1, 2))
+    >>> mock.assert_called_with(match_foo)
+
+The `Matcher` is instantiated with our compare function and the `Foo` object
+we want to compare against. In `assert_called_with` the `Matcher` equality
+method will be called, which compares the object the mock was called with
+against the one we created our matcher with. If they match then
+`assert_called_with` passes, and if they don't an `AssertionError` is raised:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> match_wrong = Matcher(compare, Foo(3, 4))
+    >>> mock.assert_called_with(match_wrong)
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+        ...
+    AssertionError: Expected: ((<Matcher object at 0x...>,), {})
+    Called with: ((<Foo object at 0x...>,), {})
+
+With a bit of tweaking you could have the comparison function raise the
+`AssertionError` directly and provide a more useful failure message.
+
+As of version 1.5, the Python testing library `PyHamcrest
+<http://pypi.python.org/pypi/PyHamcrest>`_ provides similar functionality,
+that may be useful here, in the form of its equality matcher
+(`hamcrest.library.integration.match_equality
+<http://packages.python.org/PyHamcrest/integration.html#hamcrest.library.integration.match_equality>`_).
+
+
+Less verbose configuration of mock objects
+==========================================
+
+This recipe, for easier configuration of mock objects, is now part of `Mock`.
+See the :meth:`~Mock.configure_mock` method.
+
+
+Matching any argument in assertions
+===================================
+
+This example is now built in to mock. See :data:`ANY`.
+
+
+Mocking Properties
+==================
+
+This example is now built in to mock. See :class:`PropertyMock`.
+
+
+Mocking open
+============
+
+This example is now built in to mock. See :func:`mock_open`.
+
+
+Mocks without some attributes
+=============================
+
+This example is now built in to mock. See :ref:`deleting-attributes`.

Added: incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/getting-started.txt
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/getting-started.txt?rev=1435472&view=auto
==============================================================================
--- incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/getting-started.txt (added)
+++ incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/getting-started.txt Sat Jan 19 02:33:01 2013
@@ -0,0 +1,479 @@
+===========================
+ Getting Started with Mock
+===========================
+
+.. _getting-started:
+
+.. index:: Getting Started
+
+.. testsetup::
+
+    class SomeClass(object):
+        static_method = None
+        class_method = None
+        attribute = None
+
+    sys.modules['package'] = package = Mock(name='package')
+    sys.modules['package.module'] = module = package.module
+    sys.modules['module'] = package.module
+
+
+Using Mock
+==========
+
+Mock Patching Methods
+---------------------
+
+Common uses for :class:`Mock` objects include:
+
+* Patching methods
+* Recording method calls on objects
+
+You might want to replace a method on an object to check that
+it is called with the correct arguments by another part of the system:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> real = SomeClass()
+    >>> real.method = MagicMock(name='method')
+    >>> real.method(3, 4, 5, key='value')
+    <MagicMock name='method()' id='...'>
+
+Once our mock has been used (`real.method` in this example) it has methods
+and attributes that allow you to make assertions about how it has been used.
+
+.. note::
+
+    In most of these examples the :class:`Mock` and :class:`MagicMock` classes
+    are interchangeable. As the `MagicMock` is the more capable class it makes
+    a sensible one to use by default.
+
+Once the mock has been called its :attr:`~Mock.called` attribute is set to
+`True`. More importantly we can use the :meth:`~Mock.assert_called_with` or
+:meth:`~Mock.assert_called_once_with` method to check that it was called with
+the correct arguments.
+
+This example tests that calling `ProductionClass().method` results in a call to
+the `something` method:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> from mock import MagicMock
+    >>> class ProductionClass(object):
+    ...     def method(self):
+    ...         self.something(1, 2, 3)
+    ...     def something(self, a, b, c):
+    ...         pass
+    ...
+    >>> real = ProductionClass()
+    >>> real.something = MagicMock()
+    >>> real.method()
+    >>> real.something.assert_called_once_with(1, 2, 3)
+
+
+
+Mock for Method Calls on an Object
+----------------------------------
+
+In the last example we patched a method directly on an object to check that it
+was called correctly. Another common use case is to pass an object into a
+method (or some part of the system under test) and then check that it is used
+in the correct way.
+
+The simple `ProductionClass` below has a `closer` method. If it is called with
+an object then it calls `close` on it.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class ProductionClass(object):
+    ...     def closer(self, something):
+    ...         something.close()
+    ...
+
+So to test it we need to pass in an object with a `close` method and check
+that it was called correctly.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> real = ProductionClass()
+    >>> mock = Mock()
+    >>> real.closer(mock)
+    >>> mock.close.assert_called_with()
+
+We don't have to do any work to provide the 'close' method on our mock.
+Accessing close creates it. So, if 'close' hasn't already been called then
+accessing it in the test will create it, but :meth:`~Mock.assert_called_with`
+will raise a failure exception.
+
+
+Mocking Classes
+---------------
+
+A common use case is to mock out classes instantiated by your code under test.
+When you patch a class, then that class is replaced with a mock. Instances
+are created by *calling the class*. This means you access the "mock instance"
+by looking at the return value of the mocked class.
+
+In the example below we have a function `some_function` that instantiates `Foo`
+and calls a method on it. The call to `patch` replaces the class `Foo` with a
+mock. The `Foo` instance is the result of calling the mock, so it is configured
+by modifying the mock :attr:`~Mock.return_value`.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> def some_function():
+    ...     instance = module.Foo()
+    ...     return instance.method()
+    ...
+    >>> with patch('module.Foo') as mock:
+    ...     instance = mock.return_value
+    ...     instance.method.return_value = 'the result'
+    ...     result = some_function()
+    ...     assert result == 'the result'
+
+
+Naming your mocks
+-----------------
+
+It can be useful to give your mocks a name. The name is shown in the repr of
+the mock and can be helpful when the mock appears in test failure messages. The
+name is also propagated to attributes or methods of the mock:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = MagicMock(name='foo')
+    >>> mock
+    <MagicMock name='foo' id='...'>
+    >>> mock.method
+    <MagicMock name='foo.method' id='...'>
+
+
+Tracking all Calls
+------------------
+
+Often you want to track more than a single call to a method. The
+:attr:`~Mock.mock_calls` attribute records all calls
+to child attributes of the mock - and also to their children.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = MagicMock()
+    >>> mock.method()
+    <MagicMock name='mock.method()' id='...'>
+    >>> mock.attribute.method(10, x=53)
+    <MagicMock name='mock.attribute.method()' id='...'>
+    >>> mock.mock_calls
+    [call.method(), call.attribute.method(10, x=53)]
+
+If you make an assertion about `mock_calls` and any unexpected methods
+have been called, then the assertion will fail. This is useful because as well
+as asserting that the calls you expected have been made, you are also checking
+that they were made in the right order and with no additional calls:
+
+You use the :data:`call` object to construct lists for comparing with
+`mock_calls`:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> expected = [call.method(), call.attribute.method(10, x=53)]
+    >>> mock.mock_calls == expected
+    True
+
+
+Setting Return Values and Attributes
+------------------------------------
+
+Setting the return values on a mock object is trivially easy:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock()
+    >>> mock.return_value = 3
+    >>> mock()
+    3
+
+Of course you can do the same for methods on the mock:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock()
+    >>> mock.method.return_value = 3
+    >>> mock.method()
+    3
+
+The return value can also be set in the constructor:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock(return_value=3)
+    >>> mock()
+    3
+
+If you need an attribute setting on your mock, just do it:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock()
+    >>> mock.x = 3
+    >>> mock.x
+    3
+
+Sometimes you want to mock up a more complex situation, like for example
+`mock.connection.cursor().execute("SELECT 1")`. If we wanted this call to
+return a list, then we have to configure the result of the nested call.
+
+We can use :data:`call` to construct the set of calls in a "chained call" like
+this for easy assertion afterwards:
+
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock()
+    >>> cursor = mock.connection.cursor.return_value
+    >>> cursor.execute.return_value = ['foo']
+    >>> mock.connection.cursor().execute("SELECT 1")
+    ['foo']
+    >>> expected = call.connection.cursor().execute("SELECT 1").call_list()
+    >>> mock.mock_calls
+    [call.connection.cursor(), call.connection.cursor().execute('SELECT 1')]
+    >>> mock.mock_calls == expected
+    True
+
+It is the call to `.call_list()` that turns our call object into a list of
+calls representing the chained calls.
+
+
+
+Raising exceptions with mocks
+-----------------------------
+
+A useful attribute is :attr:`~Mock.side_effect`. If you set this to an
+exception class or instance then the exception will be raised when the mock
+is called.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock(side_effect=Exception('Boom!'))
+    >>> mock()
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+      ...
+    Exception: Boom!
+
+
+Side effect functions and iterables
+-----------------------------------
+
+`side_effect` can also be set to a function or an iterable. The use case for
+`side_effect` as an iterable is where your mock is going to be called several
+times, and you want each call to return a different value. When you set
+`side_effect` to an iterable every call to the mock returns the next value
+from the iterable:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = MagicMock(side_effect=[4, 5, 6])
+    >>> mock()
+    4
+    >>> mock()
+    5
+    >>> mock()
+    6
+
+
+For more advanced use cases, like dynamically varying the return values
+depending on what the mock is called with, `side_effect` can be a function.
+The function will be called with the same arguments as the mock. Whatever the
+function returns is what the call returns:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> vals = {(1, 2): 1, (2, 3): 2}
+    >>> def side_effect(*args):
+    ...     return vals[args]
+    ...
+    >>> mock = MagicMock(side_effect=side_effect)
+    >>> mock(1, 2)
+    1
+    >>> mock(2, 3)
+    2
+
+
+Creating a Mock from an Existing Object
+---------------------------------------
+
+One problem with over use of mocking is that it couples your tests to the
+implementation of your mocks rather than your real code. Suppose you have a
+class that implements `some_method`. In a test for another class, you
+provide a mock of this object that *also* provides `some_method`. If later
+you refactor the first class, so that it no longer has `some_method` - then
+your tests will continue to pass even though your code is now broken!
+
+`Mock` allows you to provide an object as a specification for the mock,
+using the `spec` keyword argument. Accessing methods / attributes on the
+mock that don't exist on your specification object will immediately raise an
+attribute error. If you change the implementation of your specification, then
+tests that use that class will start failing immediately without you having to
+instantiate the class in those tests.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock(spec=SomeClass)
+    >>> mock.old_method()
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+       ...
+    AttributeError: object has no attribute 'old_method'
+
+If you want a stronger form of specification that prevents the setting
+of arbitrary attributes as well as the getting of them then you can use
+`spec_set` instead of `spec`.
+
+
+
+Patch Decorators
+================
+
+.. note::
+
+   With `patch` it matters that you patch objects in the namespace where they
+   are looked up. This is normally straightforward, but for a quick guide
+   read :ref:`where to patch <where-to-patch>`.
+
+
+A common need in tests is to patch a class attribute or a module attribute,
+for example patching a builtin or patching a class in a module to test that it
+is instantiated. Modules and classes are effectively global, so patching on
+them has to be undone after the test or the patch will persist into other
+tests and cause hard to diagnose problems.
+
+mock provides three convenient decorators for this: `patch`, `patch.object` and
+`patch.dict`. `patch` takes a single string, of the form
+`package.module.Class.attribute` to specify the attribute you are patching. It
+also optionally takes a value that you want the attribute (or class or
+whatever) to be replaced with. 'patch.object' takes an object and the name of
+the attribute you would like patched, plus optionally the value to patch it
+with.
+
+`patch.object`:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> original = SomeClass.attribute
+    >>> @patch.object(SomeClass, 'attribute', sentinel.attribute)
+    ... def test():
+    ...     assert SomeClass.attribute == sentinel.attribute
+    ...
+    >>> test()
+    >>> assert SomeClass.attribute == original
+
+    >>> @patch('package.module.attribute', sentinel.attribute)
+    ... def test():
+    ...     from package.module import attribute
+    ...     assert attribute is sentinel.attribute
+    ...
+    >>> test()
+
+If you are patching a module (including `__builtin__`) then use `patch`
+instead of `patch.object`:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = MagicMock(return_value = sentinel.file_handle)
+    >>> with patch('__builtin__.open', mock):
+    ...     handle = open('filename', 'r')
+    ...
+    >>> mock.assert_called_with('filename', 'r')
+    >>> assert handle == sentinel.file_handle, "incorrect file handle returned"
+
+The module name can be 'dotted', in the form `package.module` if needed:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> @patch('package.module.ClassName.attribute', sentinel.attribute)
+    ... def test():
+    ...     from package.module import ClassName
+    ...     assert ClassName.attribute == sentinel.attribute
+    ...
+    >>> test()
+
+A nice pattern is to actually decorate test methods themselves:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class MyTest(unittest2.TestCase):
+    ...     @patch.object(SomeClass, 'attribute', sentinel.attribute)
+    ...     def test_something(self):
+    ...         self.assertEqual(SomeClass.attribute, sentinel.attribute)
+    ...
+    >>> original = SomeClass.attribute
+    >>> MyTest('test_something').test_something()
+    >>> assert SomeClass.attribute == original
+
+If you want to patch with a Mock, you can use `patch` with only one argument
+(or `patch.object` with two arguments). The mock will be created for you and
+passed into the test function / method:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class MyTest(unittest2.TestCase):
+    ...     @patch.object(SomeClass, 'static_method')
+    ...     def test_something(self, mock_method):
+    ...         SomeClass.static_method()
+    ...         mock_method.assert_called_with()
+    ...
+    >>> MyTest('test_something').test_something()
+
+You can stack up multiple patch decorators using this pattern:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class MyTest(unittest2.TestCase):
+    ...     @patch('package.module.ClassName1')
+    ...     @patch('package.module.ClassName2')
+    ...     def test_something(self, MockClass2, MockClass1):
+    ...         self.assertTrue(package.module.ClassName1 is MockClass1)
+    ...         self.assertTrue(package.module.ClassName2 is MockClass2)
+    ...
+    >>> MyTest('test_something').test_something()
+
+When you nest patch decorators the mocks are passed in to the decorated
+function in the same order they applied (the normal *python* order that
+decorators are applied). This means from the bottom up, so in the example
+above the mock for `test_module.ClassName2` is passed in first.
+
+There is also :func:`patch.dict` for setting values in a dictionary just
+during a scope and restoring the dictionary to its original state when the test
+ends:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+   >>> foo = {'key': 'value'}
+   >>> original = foo.copy()
+   >>> with patch.dict(foo, {'newkey': 'newvalue'}, clear=True):
+   ...     assert foo == {'newkey': 'newvalue'}
+   ...
+   >>> assert foo == original
+
+`patch`, `patch.object` and `patch.dict` can all be used as context managers.
+
+Where you use `patch` to create a mock for you, you can get a reference to the
+mock using the "as" form of the with statement:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class ProductionClass(object):
+    ...     def method(self):
+    ...         pass
+    ...
+    >>> with patch.object(ProductionClass, 'method') as mock_method:
+    ...     mock_method.return_value = None
+    ...     real = ProductionClass()
+    ...     real.method(1, 2, 3)
+    ...
+    >>> mock_method.assert_called_with(1, 2, 3)
+
+
+As an alternative `patch`, `patch.object` and `patch.dict` can be used as
+class decorators. When used in this way it is the same as applying the
+decorator indvidually to every method whose name starts with "test".
+
+For some more advanced examples, see the :ref:`further-examples` page.

Added: incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/helpers.txt
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/helpers.txt?rev=1435472&view=auto
==============================================================================
--- incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/helpers.txt (added)
+++ incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/helpers.txt Sat Jan 19 02:33:01 2013
@@ -0,0 +1,583 @@
+=========
+ Helpers
+=========
+
+.. currentmodule:: mock
+
+.. testsetup::
+
+    mock.FILTER_DIR = True
+    from pprint import pprint as pp
+    original_dir = dir
+    def dir(obj):
+        print pp(original_dir(obj))
+
+    import urllib2
+    __main__.urllib2 = urllib2
+
+.. testcleanup::
+
+    dir = original_dir
+    mock.FILTER_DIR = True
+
+
+
+call
+====
+
+.. function:: call(*args, **kwargs)
+
+    `call` is a helper object for making simpler assertions, for comparing
+    with :attr:`~Mock.call_args`, :attr:`~Mock.call_args_list`,
+    :attr:`~Mock.mock_calls` and :attr: `~Mock.method_calls`. `call` can also be
+    used with :meth:`~Mock.assert_has_calls`.
+
+    .. doctest::
+
+        >>> m = MagicMock(return_value=None)
+        >>> m(1, 2, a='foo', b='bar')
+        >>> m()
+        >>> m.call_args_list == [call(1, 2, a='foo', b='bar'), call()]
+        True
+
+.. method:: call.call_list()
+
+    For a call object that represents multiple calls, `call_list`
+    returns a list of all the intermediate calls as well as the
+    final call.
+
+`call_list` is particularly useful for making assertions on "chained calls". A
+chained call is multiple calls on a single line of code. This results in
+multiple entries in :attr:`~Mock.mock_calls` on a mock. Manually constructing
+the sequence of calls can be tedious.
+
+:meth:`~call.call_list` can construct the sequence of calls from the same
+chained call:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> m = MagicMock()
+    >>> m(1).method(arg='foo').other('bar')(2.0)
+    <MagicMock name='mock().method().other()()' id='...'>
+    >>> kall = call(1).method(arg='foo').other('bar')(2.0)
+    >>> kall.call_list()
+    [call(1),
+     call().method(arg='foo'),
+     call().method().other('bar'),
+     call().method().other()(2.0)]
+    >>> m.mock_calls == kall.call_list()
+    True
+
+.. _calls-as-tuples:
+
+A `call` object is either a tuple of (positional args, keyword args) or
+(name, positional args, keyword args) depending on how it was constructed. When
+you construct them yourself this isn't particularly interesting, but the `call`
+objects that are in the :attr:`Mock.call_args`, :attr:`Mock.call_args_list` and
+:attr:`Mock.mock_calls` attributes can be introspected to get at the individual
+arguments they contain.
+
+The `call` objects in :attr:`Mock.call_args` and :attr:`Mock.call_args_list`
+are two-tuples of (positional args, keyword args) whereas the `call` objects
+in :attr:`Mock.mock_calls`, along with ones you construct yourself, are
+three-tuples of (name, positional args, keyword args).
+
+You can use their "tupleness" to pull out the individual arguments for more
+complex introspection and assertions. The positional arguments are a tuple
+(an empty tuple if there are no positional arguments) and the keyword
+arguments are a dictionary:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> m = MagicMock(return_value=None)
+    >>> m(1, 2, 3, arg='one', arg2='two')
+    >>> kall = m.call_args
+    >>> args, kwargs = kall
+    >>> args
+    (1, 2, 3)
+    >>> kwargs
+    {'arg2': 'two', 'arg': 'one'}
+    >>> args is kall[0]
+    True
+    >>> kwargs is kall[1]
+    True
+
+    >>> m = MagicMock()
+    >>> m.foo(4, 5, 6, arg='two', arg2='three')
+    <MagicMock name='mock.foo()' id='...'>
+    >>> kall = m.mock_calls[0]
+    >>> name, args, kwargs = kall
+    >>> name
+    'foo'
+    >>> args
+    (4, 5, 6)
+    >>> kwargs
+    {'arg2': 'three', 'arg': 'two'}
+    >>> name is m.mock_calls[0][0]
+    True
+
+
+create_autospec
+===============
+
+.. function:: create_autospec(spec, spec_set=False, instance=False, **kwargs)
+
+    Create a mock object using another object as a spec. Attributes on the
+    mock will use the corresponding attribute on the `spec` object as their
+    spec.
+
+    Functions or methods being mocked will have their arguments checked to
+    ensure that they are called with the correct signature.
+
+    If `spec_set` is `True` then attempting to set attributes that don't exist
+    on the spec object will raise an `AttributeError`.
+
+    If a class is used as a spec then the return value of the mock (the
+    instance of the class) will have the same spec. You can use a class as the
+    spec for an instance object by passing `instance=True`. The returned mock
+    will only be callable if instances of the mock are callable.
+
+    `create_autospec` also takes arbitrary keyword arguments that are passed to
+    the constructor of the created mock.
+
+See :ref:`auto-speccing` for examples of how to use auto-speccing with
+`create_autospec` and the `autospec` argument to :func:`patch`.
+
+
+ANY
+===
+
+.. data:: ANY
+
+Sometimes you may need to make assertions about *some* of the arguments in a
+call to mock, but either not care about some of the arguments or want to pull
+them individually out of :attr:`~Mock.call_args` and make more complex
+assertions on them.
+
+To ignore certain arguments you can pass in objects that compare equal to
+*everything*. Calls to :meth:`~Mock.assert_called_with` and
+:meth:`~Mock.assert_called_once_with` will then succeed no matter what was
+passed in.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock(return_value=None)
+    >>> mock('foo', bar=object())
+    >>> mock.assert_called_once_with('foo', bar=ANY)
+
+`ANY` can also be used in comparisons with call lists like
+:attr:`~Mock.mock_calls`:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> m = MagicMock(return_value=None)
+    >>> m(1)
+    >>> m(1, 2)
+    >>> m(object())
+    >>> m.mock_calls == [call(1), call(1, 2), ANY]
+    True
+
+
+
+FILTER_DIR
+==========
+
+.. data:: FILTER_DIR
+
+`FILTER_DIR` is a module level variable that controls the way mock objects
+respond to `dir` (only for Python 2.6 or more recent). The default is `True`,
+which uses the filtering described below, to only show useful members. If you
+dislike this filtering, or need to switch it off for diagnostic purposes, then
+set `mock.FILTER_DIR = False`.
+
+With filtering on, `dir(some_mock)` shows only useful attributes and will
+include any dynamically created attributes that wouldn't normally be shown.
+If the mock was created with a `spec` (or `autospec` of course) then all the
+attributes from the original are shown, even if they haven't been accessed
+yet:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> dir(Mock())
+    ['assert_any_call',
+     'assert_called_once_with',
+     'assert_called_with',
+     'assert_has_calls',
+     'attach_mock',
+     ...
+    >>> import urllib2
+    >>> dir(Mock(spec=urllib2))
+    ['AbstractBasicAuthHandler',
+     'AbstractDigestAuthHandler',
+     'AbstractHTTPHandler',
+     'BaseHandler',
+     ...
+
+Many of the not-very-useful (private to `Mock` rather than the thing being
+mocked) underscore and double underscore prefixed attributes have been
+filtered from the result of calling `dir` on a `Mock`. If you dislike this
+behaviour you can switch it off by setting the module level switch
+`FILTER_DIR`:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> import mock
+    >>> mock.FILTER_DIR = False
+    >>> dir(mock.Mock())
+    ['_NonCallableMock__get_return_value',
+     '_NonCallableMock__get_side_effect',
+     '_NonCallableMock__return_value_doc',
+     '_NonCallableMock__set_return_value',
+     '_NonCallableMock__set_side_effect',
+     '__call__',
+     '__class__',
+     ...
+
+Alternatively you can just use `vars(my_mock)` (instance members) and
+`dir(type(my_mock))` (type members) to bypass the filtering irrespective of
+`mock.FILTER_DIR`.
+
+
+mock_open
+=========
+
+.. function:: mock_open(mock=None, read_data=None)
+
+    A helper function to create a mock to replace the use of `open`. It works
+    for `open` called directly or used as a context manager.
+
+    The `mock` argument is the mock object to configure. If `None` (the
+    default) then a `MagicMock` will be created for you, with the API limited
+    to methods or attributes available on standard file handles.
+
+    `read_data` is a string for the `read` method of the file handle to return.
+    This is an empty string by default.
+
+Using `open` as a context manager is a great way to ensure your file handles
+are closed properly and is becoming common::
+
+    with open('/some/path', 'w') as f:
+        f.write('something')
+
+The issue is that even if you mock out the call to `open` it is the
+*returned object* that is used as a context manager (and has `__enter__` and
+`__exit__` called).
+
+Mocking context managers with a :class:`MagicMock` is common enough and fiddly
+enough that a helper function is useful.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> from mock import mock_open
+    >>> m = mock_open()
+    >>> with patch('__main__.open', m, create=True):
+    ...     with open('foo', 'w') as h:
+    ...         h.write('some stuff')
+    ...
+    >>> m.mock_calls
+    [call('foo', 'w'),
+     call().__enter__(),
+     call().write('some stuff'),
+     call().__exit__(None, None, None)]
+    >>> m.assert_called_once_with('foo', 'w')
+    >>> handle = m()
+    >>> handle.write.assert_called_once_with('some stuff')
+
+And for reading files:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> with patch('__main__.open', mock_open(read_data='bibble'), create=True) as m:
+    ...     with open('foo') as h:
+    ...         result = h.read()
+    ...
+    >>> m.assert_called_once_with('foo')
+    >>> assert result == 'bibble'
+
+
+.. _auto-speccing:
+
+Autospeccing
+============
+
+Autospeccing is based on the existing `spec` feature of mock. It limits the
+api of mocks to the api of an original object (the spec), but it is recursive
+(implemented lazily) so that attributes of mocks only have the same api as
+the attributes of the spec. In addition mocked functions / methods have the
+same call signature as the original so they raise a `TypeError` if they are
+called incorrectly.
+
+Before I explain how auto-speccing works, here's why it is needed.
+
+`Mock` is a very powerful and flexible object, but it suffers from two flaws
+when used to mock out objects from a system under test. One of these flaws is
+specific to the `Mock` api and the other is a more general problem with using
+mock objects.
+
+First the problem specific to `Mock`. `Mock` has two assert methods that are
+extremely handy: :meth:`~Mock.assert_called_with` and
+:meth:`~Mock.assert_called_once_with`.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock(name='Thing', return_value=None)
+    >>> mock(1, 2, 3)
+    >>> mock.assert_called_once_with(1, 2, 3)
+    >>> mock(1, 2, 3)
+    >>> mock.assert_called_once_with(1, 2, 3)
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+     ...
+    AssertionError: Expected to be called once. Called 2 times.
+
+Because mocks auto-create attributes on demand, and allow you to call them
+with arbitrary arguments, if you misspell one of these assert methods then
+your assertion is gone:
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    >>> mock = Mock(name='Thing', return_value=None)
+    >>> mock(1, 2, 3)
+    >>> mock.assret_called_once_with(4, 5, 6)
+
+Your tests can pass silently and incorrectly because of the typo.
+
+The second issue is more general to mocking. If you refactor some of your
+code, rename members and so on, any tests for code that is still using the
+*old api* but uses mocks instead of the real objects will still pass. This
+means your tests can all pass even though your code is broken.
+
+Note that this is another reason why you need integration tests as well as
+unit tests. Testing everything in isolation is all fine and dandy, but if you
+don't test how your units are "wired together" there is still lots of room
+for bugs that tests might have caught.
+
+`mock` already provides a feature to help with this, called speccing. If you
+use a class or instance as the `spec` for a mock then you can only access
+attributes on the mock that exist on the real class:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> import urllib2
+    >>> mock = Mock(spec=urllib2.Request)
+    >>> mock.assret_called_with
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+     ...
+    AttributeError: Mock object has no attribute 'assret_called_with'
+
+The spec only applies to the mock itself, so we still have the same issue
+with any methods on the mock:
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    >>> mock.has_data()
+    <mock.Mock object at 0x...>
+    >>> mock.has_data.assret_called_with()
+
+Auto-speccing solves this problem. You can either pass `autospec=True` to
+`patch` / `patch.object` or use the `create_autospec` function to create a
+mock with a spec. If you use the `autospec=True` argument to `patch` then the
+object that is being replaced will be used as the spec object. Because the
+speccing is done "lazily" (the spec is created as attributes on the mock are
+accessed) you can use it with very complex or deeply nested objects (like
+modules that import modules that import modules) without a big performance
+hit.
+
+Here's an example of it in use:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> import urllib2
+    >>> patcher = patch('__main__.urllib2', autospec=True)
+    >>> mock_urllib2 = patcher.start()
+    >>> urllib2 is mock_urllib2
+    True
+    >>> urllib2.Request
+    <MagicMock name='urllib2.Request' spec='Request' id='...'>
+
+You can see that `urllib2.Request` has a spec. `urllib2.Request` takes two
+arguments in the constructor (one of which is `self`). Here's what happens if
+we try to call it incorrectly:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> req = urllib2.Request()
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+     ...
+    TypeError: <lambda>() takes at least 2 arguments (1 given)
+
+The spec also applies to instantiated classes (i.e. the return value of
+specced mocks):
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> req = urllib2.Request('foo')
+    >>> req
+    <NonCallableMagicMock name='urllib2.Request()' spec='Request' id='...'>
+
+`Request` objects are not callable, so the return value of instantiating our
+mocked out `urllib2.Request` is a non-callable mock. With the spec in place
+any typos in our asserts will raise the correct error:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> req.add_header('spam', 'eggs')
+    <MagicMock name='urllib2.Request().add_header()' id='...'>
+    >>> req.add_header.assret_called_with
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+     ...
+    AttributeError: Mock object has no attribute 'assret_called_with'
+    >>> req.add_header.assert_called_with('spam', 'eggs')
+
+In many cases you will just be able to add `autospec=True` to your existing
+`patch` calls and then be protected against bugs due to typos and api
+changes.
+
+As well as using `autospec` through `patch` there is a
+:func:`create_autospec` for creating autospecced mocks directly:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> import urllib2
+    >>> mock_urllib2 = create_autospec(urllib2)
+    >>> mock_urllib2.Request('foo', 'bar')
+    <NonCallableMagicMock name='mock.Request()' spec='Request' id='...'>
+
+This isn't without caveats and limitations however, which is why it is not
+the default behaviour. In order to know what attributes are available on the
+spec object, autospec has to introspect (access attributes) the spec. As you
+traverse attributes on the mock a corresponding traversal of the original
+object is happening under the hood. If any of your specced objects have
+properties or descriptors that can trigger code execution then you may not be
+able to use autospec. On the other hand it is much better to design your
+objects so that introspection is safe [#]_.
+
+A more serious problem is that it is common for instance attributes to be
+created in the `__init__` method and not to exist on the class at all.
+`autospec` can't know about any dynamically created attributes and restricts
+the api to visible attributes.
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class Something(object):
+    ...   def __init__(self):
+    ...     self.a = 33
+    ...
+    >>> with patch('__main__.Something', autospec=True):
+    ...   thing = Something()
+    ...   thing.a
+    ...
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+      ...
+    AttributeError: Mock object has no attribute 'a'
+
+There are a few different ways of resolving this problem. The easiest, but
+not necessarily the least annoying, way is to simply set the required
+attributes on the mock after creation. Just because `autospec` doesn't allow
+you to fetch attributes that don't exist on the spec it doesn't prevent you
+setting them:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> with patch('__main__.Something', autospec=True):
+    ...   thing = Something()
+    ...   thing.a = 33
+    ...
+
+There is a more aggressive version of both `spec` and `autospec` that *does*
+prevent you setting non-existent attributes. This is useful if you want to
+ensure your code only *sets* valid attributes too, but obviously it prevents
+this particular scenario:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> with patch('__main__.Something', autospec=True, spec_set=True):
+    ...   thing = Something()
+    ...   thing.a = 33
+    ...
+    Traceback (most recent call last):
+     ...
+    AttributeError: Mock object has no attribute 'a'
+
+Probably the best way of solving the problem is to add class attributes as
+default values for instance members initialised in `__init__`. Note that if
+you are only setting default attributes in `__init__` then providing them via
+class attributes (shared between instances of course) is faster too. e.g.
+
+.. code-block:: python
+
+    class Something(object):
+        a = 33
+
+This brings up another issue. It is relatively common to provide a default
+value of `None` for members that will later be an object of a different type.
+`None` would be useless as a spec because it wouldn't let you access *any*
+attributes or methods on it. As `None` is *never* going to be useful as a
+spec, and probably indicates a member that will normally of some other type,
+`autospec` doesn't use a spec for members that are set to `None`. These will
+just be ordinary mocks (well - `MagicMocks`):
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class Something(object):
+    ...     member = None
+    ...
+    >>> mock = create_autospec(Something)
+    >>> mock.member.foo.bar.baz()
+    <MagicMock name='mock.member.foo.bar.baz()' id='...'>
+
+If modifying your production classes to add defaults isn't to your liking
+then there are more options. One of these is simply to use an instance as the
+spec rather than the class. The other is to create a subclass of the
+production class and add the defaults to the subclass without affecting the
+production class. Both of these require you to use an alternative object as
+the spec. Thankfully `patch` supports this - you can simply pass the
+alternative object as the `autospec` argument:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> class Something(object):
+    ...   def __init__(self):
+    ...     self.a = 33
+    ...
+    >>> class SomethingForTest(Something):
+    ...   a = 33
+    ...
+    >>> p = patch('__main__.Something', autospec=SomethingForTest)
+    >>> mock = p.start()
+    >>> mock.a
+    <NonCallableMagicMock name='Something.a' spec='int' id='...'>
+
+.. note::
+
+    An additional limitation (currently) with `autospec` is that unbound
+    methods on mocked classes *don't* take an "explicit self" as the first
+    argument - so this usage will fail with `autospec`.
+
+    .. doctest::
+
+        >>> class Foo(object):
+        ...   def foo(self):
+        ...     pass
+        ...
+        >>> Foo.foo(Foo())
+        >>> MockFoo = create_autospec(Foo)
+        >>> MockFoo.foo(MockFoo())
+        Traceback (most recent call last):
+          ...
+        TypeError: <lambda>() takes exactly 1 argument (2 given)
+
+    The reason is that its very hard to tell the difference between functions,
+    unbound methods and staticmethods across Python 2 & 3 and the alternative
+    implementations. This restriction may be fixed in future versions.
+
+
+------
+
+.. [#] This only applies to classes or already instantiated objects. Calling
+   a mocked class to create a mock instance *does not* create a real instance.
+   It is only attribute lookups - along with calls to `dir` - that are done. A
+   way round this problem would have been to use `getattr_static
+   <http://docs.python.org/dev/library/inspect.html#inspect.getattr_static>`_,
+   which can fetch attributes without triggering code execution. Descriptors
+   like `classmethod` and `staticmethod` *need* to be fetched correctly though,
+   so that their signatures can be mocked correctly.

Added: incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/index.txt
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/index.txt?rev=1435472&view=auto
==============================================================================
--- incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/index.txt (added)
+++ incubator/ambari/trunk/ambari-common/src/test/python/mock/docs/index.txt Sat Jan 19 02:33:01 2013
@@ -0,0 +1,411 @@
+====================================
+ Mock - Mocking and Testing Library
+====================================
+
+.. currentmodule:: mock
+
+:Author: `Michael Foord
+ <http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/weblog/index.shtml>`_
+:Version: |release|
+:Date: 2012/10/07
+:Homepage: `Mock Homepage`_
+:Download: `Mock on PyPI`_
+:Documentation: `PDF Documentation
+ <http://www.voidspace.org.uk/downloads/mock-1.0.1.pdf>`_
+:License: `BSD License`_
+:Support: `Mailing list (testing-in-python@lists.idyll.org)
+ <http://lists.idyll.org/listinfo/testing-in-python>`_
+:Issue tracker: `Google code project
+ <http://code.google.com/p/mock/issues/list>`_
+
+.. _Mock Homepage: http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/mock/
+.. _BSD License: http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/license.shtml
+
+
+.. currentmodule:: mock
+
+.. module:: mock
+   :synopsis: Mock object and testing library.
+
+.. index:: introduction
+
+mock is a library for testing in Python. It allows you to replace parts of
+your system under test with mock objects and make assertions about how they
+have been used.
+
+mock is now part of the Python standard library, available as `unittest.mock
+<http://docs.python.org/py3k/library/unittest.mock.html#module-unittest.mock>`_
+in Python 3.3 onwards.
+
+mock provides a core :class:`Mock` class removing the need to create a host
+of stubs throughout your test suite. After performing an action, you can make
+assertions about which methods / attributes were used and arguments they were
+called with. You can also specify return values and set needed attributes in
+the normal way.
+
+Additionally, mock provides a :func:`patch` decorator that handles patching
+module and class level attributes within the scope of a test, along with
+:const:`sentinel` for creating unique objects. See the `quick guide`_ for
+some examples of how to use :class:`Mock`, :class:`MagicMock` and
+:func:`patch`.
+
+Mock is very easy to use and is designed for use with
+`unittest <http://pypi.python.org/pypi/unittest2>`_. Mock is based on
+the 'action -> assertion' pattern instead of `'record -> replay'` used by many
+mocking frameworks.
+
+mock is tested on Python versions 2.4-2.7, Python 3 plus the latest versions of
+Jython and PyPy.
+
+
+.. testsetup::
+
+   class ProductionClass(object):
+      def method(self, *args):
+         pass
+
+   module = sys.modules['module'] = ProductionClass
+   ProductionClass.ClassName1 = ProductionClass
+   ProductionClass.ClassName2 = ProductionClass
+
+
+
+API Documentation
+=================
+
+.. toctree::
+   :maxdepth: 2
+
+   mock
+   patch
+   helpers
+   sentinel
+   magicmock
+
+
+User Guide
+==========
+
+.. toctree::
+   :maxdepth: 2
+
+   getting-started
+   examples
+   compare
+   changelog
+
+
+.. index:: installing
+
+Installing
+==========
+
+The current version is |release|. Mock is stable and widely used. If you do
+find any bugs, or have suggestions for improvements / extensions
+then please contact us.
+
+* `mock on PyPI <http://pypi.python.org/pypi/mock>`_
+* `mock documentation as PDF
+  <http://www.voidspace.org.uk/downloads/mock-1.0.1.pdf>`_
+* `Google Code Home & Mercurial Repository <http://code.google.com/p/mock/>`_
+
+.. index:: repository
+.. index:: hg
+
+You can checkout the latest development version from the Google Code Mercurial
+repository with the following command:
+
+    ``hg clone https://mock.googlecode.com/hg/ mock``
+
+
+.. index:: pip
+.. index:: easy_install
+.. index:: setuptools
+
+If you have pip, setuptools or distribute you can install mock with:
+
+    | ``easy_install -U mock``
+    | ``pip install -U mock``
+
+Alternatively you can download the mock distribution from PyPI and after
+unpacking run:
+
+   ``python setup.py install``
+
+
+Quick Guide
+===========
+
+:class:`Mock` and :class:`MagicMock` objects create all attributes and
+methods as you access them and store details of how they have been used. You
+can configure them, to specify return values or limit what attributes are
+available, and then make assertions about how they have been used:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> from mock import MagicMock
+    >>> thing = ProductionClass()
+    >>> thing.method = MagicMock(return_value=3)
+    >>> thing.method(3, 4, 5, key='value')
+    3
+    >>> thing.method.assert_called_with(3, 4, 5, key='value')
+
+:attr:`side_effect` allows you to perform side effects, including raising an
+exception when a mock is called:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+   >>> mock = Mock(side_effect=KeyError('foo'))
+   >>> mock()
+   Traceback (most recent call last):
+    ...
+   KeyError: 'foo'
+
+   >>> values = {'a': 1, 'b': 2, 'c': 3}
+   >>> def side_effect(arg):
+   ...     return values[arg]
+   ...
+   >>> mock.side_effect = side_effect
+   >>> mock('a'), mock('b'), mock('c')
+   (1, 2, 3)
+   >>> mock.side_effect = [5, 4, 3, 2, 1]
+   >>> mock(), mock(), mock()
+   (5, 4, 3)
+
+Mock has many other ways you can configure it and control its behaviour. For
+example the `spec` argument configures the mock to take its specification
+from another object. Attempting to access attributes or methods on the mock
+that don't exist on the spec will fail with an `AttributeError`.
+
+The :func:`patch` decorator / context manager makes it easy to mock classes or
+objects in a module under test. The object you specify will be replaced with a
+mock (or other object) during the test and restored when the test ends:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> from mock import patch
+    >>> @patch('module.ClassName2')
+    ... @patch('module.ClassName1')
+    ... def test(MockClass1, MockClass2):
+    ...     module.ClassName1()
+    ...     module.ClassName2()
+
+    ...     assert MockClass1 is module.ClassName1
+    ...     assert MockClass2 is module.ClassName2
+    ...     assert MockClass1.called
+    ...     assert MockClass2.called
+    ...
+    >>> test()
+
+.. note::
+
+   When you nest patch decorators the mocks are passed in to the decorated
+   function in the same order they applied (the normal *python* order that
+   decorators are applied). This means from the bottom up, so in the example
+   above the mock for `module.ClassName1` is passed in first.
+
+   With `patch` it matters that you patch objects in the namespace where they
+   are looked up. This is normally straightforward, but for a quick guide
+   read :ref:`where to patch <where-to-patch>`.
+
+As well as a decorator `patch` can be used as a context manager in a with
+statement:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> with patch.object(ProductionClass, 'method', return_value=None) as mock_method:
+    ...     thing = ProductionClass()
+    ...     thing.method(1, 2, 3)
+    ...
+    >>> mock_method.assert_called_once_with(1, 2, 3)
+
+
+There is also :func:`patch.dict` for setting values in a dictionary just
+during a scope and restoring the dictionary to its original state when the test
+ends:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+   >>> foo = {'key': 'value'}
+   >>> original = foo.copy()
+   >>> with patch.dict(foo, {'newkey': 'newvalue'}, clear=True):
+   ...     assert foo == {'newkey': 'newvalue'}
+   ...
+   >>> assert foo == original
+
+Mock supports the mocking of Python :ref:`magic methods <magic-methods>`. The
+easiest way of using magic methods is with the :class:`MagicMock` class. It
+allows you to do things like:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = MagicMock()
+    >>> mock.__str__.return_value = 'foobarbaz'
+    >>> str(mock)
+    'foobarbaz'
+    >>> mock.__str__.assert_called_with()
+
+Mock allows you to assign functions (or other Mock instances) to magic methods
+and they will be called appropriately. The `MagicMock` class is just a Mock
+variant that has all of the magic methods pre-created for you (well, all the
+useful ones anyway).
+
+The following is an example of using magic methods with the ordinary Mock
+class:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+    >>> mock = Mock()
+    >>> mock.__str__ = Mock(return_value='wheeeeee')
+    >>> str(mock)
+    'wheeeeee'
+
+For ensuring that the mock objects in your tests have the same api as the
+objects they are replacing, you can use :ref:`auto-speccing <auto-speccing>`.
+Auto-speccing can be done through the `autospec` argument to patch, or the
+:func:`create_autospec` function. Auto-speccing creates mock objects that
+have the same attributes and methods as the objects they are replacing, and
+any functions and methods (including constructors) have the same call
+signature as the real object.
+
+This ensures that your mocks will fail in the same way as your production
+code if they are used incorrectly:
+
+.. doctest::
+
+   >>> from mock import create_autospec
+   >>> def function(a, b, c):
+   ...     pass
+   ...
+   >>> mock_function = create_autospec(function, return_value='fishy')
+   >>> mock_function(1, 2, 3)
+   'fishy'
+   >>> mock_function.assert_called_once_with(1, 2, 3)
+   >>> mock_function('wrong arguments')
+   Traceback (most recent call last):
+    ...
+   TypeError: <lambda>() takes exactly 3 arguments (1 given)
+
+`create_autospec` can also be used on classes, where it copies the signature of
+the `__init__` method, and on callable objects where it copies the signature of
+the `__call__` method.
+
+
+.. index:: references
+.. index:: articles
+
+References
+==========
+
+Articles, blog entries and other stuff related to testing with Mock:
+
+* `Imposing a No DB Discipline on Django unit tests
+  <https://github.com/carljm/django-testing-slides/blob/master/models/30_no_database.md>`_
+* `mock-django: tools for mocking the Django ORM and models
+  <https://github.com/dcramer/mock-django>`_
+* `PyCon 2011 Video: Testing with mock <https://blip.tv/file/4881513>`_
+* `Mock objects in Python
+  <http://noopenblockers.com/2012/01/06/mock-objects-in-python/>`_
+* `Python: Injecting Mock Objects for Powerful Testing
+  <http://blueprintforge.com/blog/2012/01/08/python-injecting-mock-objects-for-powerful-testing/>`_
+* `Python Mock: How to assert a substring of logger output
+  <http://www.michaelpollmeier.com/python-mock-how-to-assert-a-substring-of-logger-output/>`_
+* `Mocking Django <http://www.mattjmorrison.com/2011/09/mocking-django.html>`_
+* `Mocking dates and other classes that can't be modified
+  <http://williamjohnbert.com/2011/07/how-to-unit-testing-in-django-with-mocking-and-patching/>`_
+* `Mock recipes <http://konryd.blogspot.com/2010/06/mock-recipies.html>`_
+* `Mockity mock mock - some love for the mock module
+  <http://konryd.blogspot.com/2010/05/mockity-mock-mock-some-love-for-mock.html>`_
+* `Coverage and Mock (with django)
+  <http://mattsnider.com/python/mock-and-coverage/>`_
+* `Python Unit Testing with Mock <http://www.insomnihack.com/?p=194>`_
+* `Getting started with Python Mock
+  <http://myadventuresincoding.wordpress.com/2011/02/26/python-python-mock-cheat-sheet/>`_
+* `Smart Parameter Checks with mock
+  <http://tobyho.com/2011/03/24/smart-parameter-checks-in/>`_
+* `Python mock testing techniques and tools
+  <http://agiletesting.blogspot.com/2009/07/python-mock-testing-techniques-and.html>`_
+* `How To Test Django Template Tags
+  <http://techblog.ironfroggy.com/2008/10/how-to-test.html>`_
+* `A presentation on Unit Testing with Mock
+  <http://pypap.blogspot.com/2008/10/newbie-nugget-unit-testing-with-mock.html>`_
+* `Mocking with Django and Google AppEngine
+  <http://michael-a-nelson.blogspot.com/2008/09/mocking-with-django-and-google-app.html>`_
+
+
+.. index:: tests
+.. index:: unittest2
+
+Tests
+=====
+
+Mock uses `unittest2 <http://pypi.python.org/pypi/unittest2>`_ for its own
+test suite. In order to run it, use the `unit2` script that comes with
+`unittest2` module on a checkout of the source repository:
+
+   `unit2 discover`
+
+If you have `setuptools <http://pypi.python.org/pypi/distribute>`_ as well as
+unittest2 you can run:
+
+   ``python setup.py test``
+
+On Python 3.2 you can use ``unittest`` module from the standard library.
+
+   ``python3.2 -m unittest discover``
+
+.. index:: Python 3
+
+On Python 3 the tests for unicode are skipped as they are not relevant. On
+Python 2.4 tests that use the with statements are skipped as the with statement
+is invalid syntax on Python 2.4.
+
+
+.. index:: older versions
+
+Older Versions
+==============
+
+Documentation for older versions of mock:
+
+* `mock 0.8 <http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/mock/0.8/>`_
+* `mock 0.7 <http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/mock/0.7/>`_
+* `mock 0.6 <http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/mock/0.6.0/>`_
+
+Docs from the in-development version of `mock` can be found at
+`mock.readthedocs.org <http://mock.readthedocs.org>`_.
+
+
+Terminology
+===========
+
+Terminology for objects used to replace other ones can be confusing. Terms
+like double, fake, mock, stub, and spy are all used with varying meanings.
+
+In `classic mock terminology
+<http://xunitpatterns.com/Mocks,%20Fakes,%20Stubs%20and%20Dummies.html>`_
+:class:`mock.Mock` is a `spy <http://xunitpatterns.com/Test%20Spy.html>`_ that
+allows for *post-mortem* examination. This is what I call the "action ->
+assertion" [#]_ pattern of testing.
+
+I'm not however a fan of this "statically typed mocking terminology"
+promulgated by `Martin Fowler
+<http://martinfowler.com/articles/mocksArentStubs.html>`_. It confuses usage
+patterns with implementation and prevents you from using natural terminology
+when discussing mocking.
+
+I much prefer duck typing, if an object used in your test suite looks like a
+mock object and quacks like a mock object then it's fine to call it a mock, no
+matter what the implementation looks like.
+
+This terminology is perhaps more useful in less capable languages where
+different usage patterns will *require* different implementations.
+`mock.Mock()` is capable of being used in most of the different roles
+described by Fowler, except (annoyingly / frustratingly / ironically) a Mock
+itself!
+
+How about a simpler definition: a "mock object" is an object used to replace a
+real one in a system under test.
+
+.. [#] This pattern is called "AAA" by some members of the testing community;
+   "Arrange - Act - Assert".



Mime
View raw message