@ron Those tests are about all the experience I have with TestFX I'm afraid. But you should be able to register the primary stage with the framework and instantiate a View pretty easily I think.

@edvin uploaded a file: Playing with TestFX

@ron This is not the best way to do things, and I don't fully understand the need for setupFixture etc, but this works at least.

I dont understand it completely either. the problem I have with that code, is the fear that too much is started to do a relatively simple test?

I removed the app stuff and went with just a view

@ron Better now I think?

looks a lot better

it might still start too much (as the view could inject controllers and such)

I most cases you don't even need to call setPrimaryStage, it could be done one time, no need to do it for every test.

@ron So you want a way to mock controllers?

in a controlled test you want as little as possible started up, only that what you actually need to do the test

@ron So the the view defines a controller, but you don't want to access it because what you call on the view doesn't need it?

@ron That's fine then, the framework won't instantiate that controller until you access it

@ron The definition of

inject

is very cheap, don't worry about that

in a 'normal JEE' application all the controllers would be interfaces which makes mocking so much easier

@ron We could pretty easily add support for interfaces for controllers

well look for example to the code of @Isaac just starting a view needs the controller which needs a database connection 🙂

@ron If you write it that way, there is nothing the framework can do 🙂 But we can introduce interfaces for controllers for sure.

This is also where DI like spring or guice comes into play where you have different setups for testing, developing, accepting and production

@ron Introducing interfaces would open up possibilities for stuff like this.

@ron Actually, due to scopes, that's pretty easy to achive. Interfaces is the only missing link, and possibly some convenience functions so you don't need to do manual plumbing

In Spring Boot I no longer make interfaces for single-implementation classes and consider it a major anti-pattern.

All modern mocking frameworks can mock concrete implementations. No reason for these interfaces IMO. E.g. both Mockito and MockK can do it.

if you dont make interfaces then how do you run tests ?

^

personally I find that an antipattern............

In my experience the extra interface increases the amount of code I have to check in and there is a lot of repetition (method signatures are duplicated).

interfaces do give repetition but you have the same with mocking, you still have to make a lot of code to setup the mocking and such, repetition but in another place

I think the only reason people started to introduce the

MyController

and

MyControllerImpl

pattern is that the test frameworks could not mock the concrete classes. Now it's just a legacy and a habit with no basis.

Umm, what do you mean? Mocking an interface and mocking a concrete class requires the same amount of code so by removing the interface you end up with less code in total.