+ +

+

Further Examples¶

+

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 getting started guide.

+

Mocking chained calls¶

+

Mocking chained calls is actually straightforward with mock once you +understand the 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:

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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 configure_mock() +method to directly set the return value for us:

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> something.backend = mock_backend
+>>> something.method()
+

+

+

Using 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 call.call_list() to create +this list of calls for us:

+

>>> 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() 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 patch decorator is used here to +mock out the date class in the module under test. The 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.

+

>>> 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 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.

+

Mocking a Generator Method¶

+

A Python generator is a function or method that uses the yield statement to +return a series of values when iterated over [1].

+

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__, so we can +mock this using a MagicMock.

+

Here’s an example class with an “iter” method implemented as a generator:

+

>>> 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().

+

>>> mock_foo = MagicMock()
+>>> mock_foo.iter.return_value = iter([1, 2, 3])
+>>> list(mock_foo.iter())
+[1, 2, 3]
+

+

+ + + + + +

[1]	There are also generator expressions and more advanced uses 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.

+

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:

+

>>> @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 patch methods: start and stop. +These allow you to move the patching into your setUp and tearDown methods.

+

>>> 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 cleanup functions make this simpler:

+

>>> 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 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:

+

>>> 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.

+

>>> 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 +assert_called_once_with() method that also asserts that the +call_count is one.

+

>>> 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 +call_args_list:

+

>>> 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 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:

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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 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.

+

>>> 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.

+

>>> 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) the arguments. +Here’s an example implementation:

+

>>> 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 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:

+

>>> 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 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:

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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 patch methods: 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:

+

>>> 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 MagicMock, which will behave like a dictionary, +and using 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 +call_args_list to assert about how the dictionary was used:

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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.

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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 +[2]. 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.

+

>>> 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 is subclassing mock to +created a Twisted adaptor. +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:

+

>>> 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)
+

+

+ + + + + +

[2]	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 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.

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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 Mock class allows you to track the order of method calls on +your mock objects through the method_calls attribute. This +doesn’t allow you to track the order of calls between separate mock objects, +however we can use 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:

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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 attach_mock() method. After +attaching calls will be recorded in mock_calls of the manager.

+

>>> 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 +assert_has_calls() method. This takes a list of calls (constructed +with the call object). If that sequence of calls are in +mock_calls then the assert succeeds.

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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 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:

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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:

+

>>> 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 provides similar functionality, +that may be useful here, in the form of its equality matcher +(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 configure_mock() method.

+

Matching any argument in assertions¶

+

This example is now built in to mock. See ANY.

+

Mocking Properties¶

+

This example is now built in to mock. See PropertyMock.

+

Mocking open¶

+

This example is now built in to mock. See mock_open().

+

Mocks without some attributes¶

+

This example is now built in to mock. See Deleting Attributes.

+

+ + +

Further Examples¶

Mocking chained calls¶

Partial mocking¶

Mocking a Generator Method¶

Applying the same patch to every test method¶

Mocking Unbound Methods¶

Checking multiple calls with mock¶

Coping with mutable arguments¶

Raising exceptions on attribute access¶

Multiple calls with different effects¶

Nesting Patches¶

Mocking a dictionary with MagicMock¶

Mock subclasses and their attributes¶

Mocking imports with patch.dict¶

Tracking order of calls and less verbose call assertions¶

More complex argument matching¶

Less verbose configuration of mock objects¶

Matching any argument in assertions¶

Mocking Properties¶

Mocking open¶

Mocks without some attributes¶

Table Of Contents

Previous topic

Next topic

This Page

Navigation

Further Examples¶

Mocking chained calls¶

Partial mocking¶

Mocking a Generator Method¶

Applying the same patch to every test method¶

Mocking Unbound Methods¶

Checking multiple calls with mock¶

Coping with mutable arguments¶

Raising exceptions on attribute access¶

Multiple calls with different effects¶

Nesting Patches¶

Mocking a dictionary with MagicMock¶

Mock subclasses and their attributes¶

Mocking imports with patch.dict¶

Tracking order of calls and less verbose call assertions¶

More complex argument matching¶

Less verbose configuration of mock objects¶

Matching any argument in assertions¶

Mocking Properties¶

Mocking open¶

Mocks without some attributes¶

Table Of Contents

Previous topic

Next topic

This Page

Quick search

Navigation