3 ways of handling exceptions in JUnit. Which one to choose?
In JUnit there are 3 popular ways of handling exceptions in your test code:
- try-catch idiom
- With JUnit rule
- With annotation
Which one should we use and when?
try-catch idiom
This idiom is one of the most popular one, because it was used already in JUnit 3.
@Test public void throwsExceptionWhenNegativeNumbersAreGiven() { try { calculator.add("-1,-2,3"); fail("Should throw an exception if one or more of given numbers are negative"); } catch (Exception e) { assertThat(e) .isInstanceOf(IllegalArgumentException.class) .hasMessage("negatives not allowed: [-1, -2]"); } }
The above approach is a common pattern. The test will fail when no exception is thrown and the exception itself is verified in a catch clause (in the above example I used the FEST Fluent Assertions) and although it is perfectly fine I prefer the approach with
ExpectedException rule.
With JUnit rule
The same example can be created using
ExceptedException rule. The rule must be a public field marked with @Rule annotation. Please note that the “thrown” rule may be reused in many tests.
@Rule public ExpectedException thrown = ExpectedException.none(); @Test public void throwsExceptionWhenNegativeNumbersAreGiven() { // arrange thrown.expect(IllegalArgumentException.class); thrown.expectMessage(equalTo("negatives not allowed: [-1, -2]")); // act calculator.add("-1,-2,3"); }
In general, I find the above code more readable hence I use this approach in my projects.
When the exception isn’t thrown you will get the following message: java.lang.AssertionError: Expected test to throw (an instance of java.lang.IllegalArgumentException and exception with message “negatives not allowed: [-1, -2]”). Pretty nice.
But not all exceptions I check with the above approach. Sometimes I need to check only the type of the exception thrown and then I use @Test annotation.
With annotation
@Test (expected = IllegalArgumentException.class) public void throwsExceptionWhenNegativeNumbersAreGiven() { // act calculator.add("-1,-2,3"); }
When the exception wasn’t thrown you will get the following message: java.lang.AssertionError: Expected exception: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException
With this approach you need to be careful though. Sometimes it is tempting to expect general Exception, RuntimeException or even a Throwable. And this is considered as a bad practice, because your code may throw exception in other place than you actually expected and your test will still pass!
To sum up, in my code I use two approaches: with JUnit rule and with annotation. The advantages are:
- Error messages when the code does not throw an exception are automagically handled
- The readability is improved
- There is less code to be created
And what is your preference?
Edit – the 4th way
I have heard of the 4th way of handling the exception (one of my colleagues suggested it after reading this post) – use custom annotation.
Actually the solution seems nice at first glance, but it requires your own JUnit runner hence it has disadvantage: you cannot use this annotation with e.g. Mockito runner.
As a coding practice I have created such an annotation, so maybe someone finds it useful
The usage
@RunWith(ExpectsExceptionRunner.class) public class StringCalculatorTest { @Test @ExpectsException(type = IllegalArgumentException.class, message = "negatives not allowed: [-1]") public void throwsExceptionWhenNegativeNumbersAreGiven() throws Exception { // act calculator.add("-1,-2,3"); } }
The above test will fail with a message: java.lang.Exception: Unexpected exception message, expected
but was
An annotation
@Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME) @Target({ElementType.METHOD}) public @interface ExpectsException { Class type(); String message() default ""; }
A runner with some copy & paste code
public class ExpectsExceptionRunner extends BlockJUnit4ClassRunner { public ExpectsExceptionRunner(Class klass) throws InitializationError { super(klass); } @Override protected Statement possiblyExpectingExceptions(FrameworkMethod method, Object test, Statement next) { ExpectsException annotation = method.getAnnotation(ExpectsException.class); if (annotation == null) { return next; } return new ExpectExceptionWithMessage(next, annotation.type(), annotation.message()); } class ExpectExceptionWithMessage extends Statement { private final Statement next; private final Class expected; private final String expectedMessage; public ExpectExceptionWithMessage(Statement next, Class expected, String expectedMessage) { this.next = next; this.expected = expected; this.expectedMessage = expectedMessage; } @Override public void evaluate() throws Exception { boolean complete = false; try { next.evaluate(); complete = true; } catch (AssumptionViolatedException e) { throw e; } catch (Throwable e) { if (!expected.isAssignableFrom(e.getClass())) { String message = "Unexpected exception, expected<" + expected.getName() + "> but was <" + e.getClass().getName() + ">"; throw new Exception(message, e); } if (isNotNull(expectedMessage) && !expectedMessage.equals(e.getMessage())) { String message = "Unexpected exception message, expected<" + expectedMessage + "> but was<" + e.getMessage() + ">"; throw new Exception(message, e); } } if (complete) { throw new AssertionError("Expected exception: " + expected.getName()); } } private boolean isNotNull(String s) { return s != null && !s.isEmpty(); } } }
I would recommend you the 5th way – the catch-exception library. It’s biggest advantage is that it allows you to catch exception only on a concrete method invocation. So, if you want to assert that NullPointerException is being thrown on a tested method, and not on the one of “arange” methods, catch-exception is the only way to do that. You can read more on that on the project’s page: https://code.google.com/p/catch-exception/
With annotation way