I am a developer, I believe in unit testing and I write a lot of them. But it was not always the case, mostly because I was working on a highly coupled code base. Whenever I wanted to test a single functionality I had to set up a lot of things (database, configuration files, …) to do so even if this functionality was not linked to these dependencies. It was spaghetti code into a big ball of mud.
Then I discovered the Dependency Injection (DI) pattern and it changed the way I designed my code and it made testing much easier. The DI purpose is to reduce coupling between software components in order to improve maintainability and testability. I created the following piece of code to demonstrate the principle :
public class User { public string Name { get; set; } public string Email { get; set; } public bool HasActivatedNotification { get; set; } } public class EmailNotifier { public void Notify(User user) { var message = string.Format("Hello {0} ...", user.Name); // Sending email // ... } } public class UserRepository { public User GetById(int userId) { // Fetching information from datasource // ... return new User { Name = "John", Email = "john@john.com" }; } } public class NotificationService { public void NotifyUser(int userId) { var repository = new UserRepository(); var user = repository.GetById(userId); if (user.HasActivatedNotification) { var notifier = new EmailNotifier(); notifier.Notify(user); } } }
The NotificationService sends an email to a given user if he has activated the notifications. Now if I want to test this logic I will have to set up a datasource for my repository and a mail inbox for the notifier. This is a lot of configuration for a simple piece of logic. This code is highly coupled because the NotifyUser method of my service instantiates its dependencies (the repository and the notifier), this means that the Single Responsibility Principle (SRP) is not respected. I will use the Constructor Injection technique to change the code :
public interface INotifier { void Notify(User user); } public class EmailNotifier : INotifier { public void Notify(User user) { var message = string.Format("Hello {0} ...", user.Name); // Sending email // ... } } public interface IUserRepository { User GetById(int userId); } public class UserRepository : IUserRepository { public User GetById(int userId) { // Fetching information from datasource // ... return new User { Name = "John", Email = "john@john.com" }; } } public class NotificationService { public NotificationService(IUserRepository repository, INotifier notifier) { _repository = repository; _notifier = notifier; } private readonly IUserRepository _repository; private readonly INotifier _notifier; public void NotifyUser(int userId) { var user = _repository.GetById(userId); if (user.HasActivatedNotification) { _notifier.Notify(user); } } }
The UserRepository and the EmailNotifier are unchanged, they just implement interfaces. Now the NotificationService uses these interfaces as fields that are injected through the constructor. The NotifyUser method can now use these dependencies without having to create them, the code is “cleaner”.
I added interfaces for the repository and the notifier for testing purpose, I can test my service with a fake repository and a fake notifier that do not require heavy configuration :
class MockNotifier : INotifier { public MockNotifier() { NotifyHasBeenCalled = false; } public bool NotifyHasBeenCalled { get; private set; } public void Notify(User user) { NotifyHasBeenCalled = true; } } class MockRepository : IUserRepository { public bool HasValidatedNotification { get; set; } public User GetById(int userId) { return new User { HasActivatedNotification = HasValidatedNotification }; } }
These two implementations are mocks, it means that they mimic the behavior of concrete classes and are used only for testing purpose. In my MockNotifier I just set a flag to true when the Notify method is called, and the GetById method of the MockRepository returns a User instance with the wanted value for HasActivatedNotification. I created a test class with NFluent to show how it is used :
[TestClass] public class NotificationServiceTest { private NotificationService _notificationService; private MockNotifier _mockNotifier; private MockRepository _mockRepository; [TestInitialize] public void TestInit() { _mockNotifier = new MockNotifier(); _mockRepository = new MockRepository(); _notificationService = new NotificationService(_mockRepository, _mockNotifier); } [TestMethod] public void NotificationActivated() { _mockRepository.HasValidatedNotification = true; _notificationService.NotifyUser(1); Check.That(_mockNotifier.NotifyHasBeenCalled).IsTrue(); } [TestMethod] public void NotificationDeactivated() { _mockRepository.HasValidatedNotification = false; _notificationService.NotifyUser(1); Check.That(_mockNotifier.NotifyHasBeenCalled).IsFalse(); } }
I can test the logic of my service without having to configure a datasource with pre-configured users and without checking in a inbox if there is an email or not. Dependency Injection reduces code coupling and makes testing easier even if you have to create dedicated classes for them. You can find more information about DI here and here.
Constructor Injection is a pattern I use because with it I improved the maintainability of my code base with less coupling and more testing, you should try it as well if it’s not the case.
See you next time !
Reblogged this on IReadable.com.
LikeLike
To understand DI framework and containers, there is also a great document about Do it Yourself Dependency Injection available here
LikeLike
Hi Mickael, I’ll check this document, thank you for sharing!
LikeLike
I hope you will enjoy the read :)
LikeLike