Typescript test private method

Thinking About Static vs. Private Methods In TypeScript / Angular 2

By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Cookie PolicyPrivacy Policyand our Terms of Service. Stack Overflow for Teams is a private, secure spot for you and your coworkers to find and share information. I'm looking at implementation of private members in TypeScript, and I find it a little confusing. Intellisense doesn't allow to access private member, but in pure JavaScript, it's all there. This makes me think that TS doesn't implement private members correctly. Any thoughts? A private property is implemented as a regular property, and code outside the class is not allowed to access it. To make something truly private inside the class, it can't be a member of the class, it would be a local variable created inside a function scope inside the code that creates the object. That would mean that you can't access it like a member of the class, i. For example if you need to cache a password temporarily. There are performance costs to using this pattern irrelevant of Javascript or Typescript and should only be used where absolutely necessary. Once support for WeakMap is more widely available there is an interesting technique detailed in example 3 here. It allows for private data AND avoids the performance costs of Jason Evans example by allowing the data to be accessible from prototype methods instead of only instance methods. Since TypeScript 3. Please note that these private fields will be something different than fields marked with private keyword. Thanks to Sean Feldman for the link to the official discussion on this issue - see his answer for the link. I realize this is an older discussion but it might still be useful to share my solution to the problem of the supposedly private variables and methods in a TypeScript "leaking" out into the public interface of the compiled JavaScript class. To me this issue is purely cosmetic, i. And if all you need is a single private property, then it gets even simpler, because you would not need to define any ClientPrivate in that case. Worth noting, that for the most part, class Private just offers a nicely readable signature, whereas direct use of WeakMap does not. How are we doing? Please help us improve Stack Overflow.

Subscribe to RSS


I heard more and more that unit testing TypeScript is hard for two reasons. Most of the time is because of how hard is to test private method or that unit tests broken easily when modifing the code thus very expensive. Here is 3 different ways to achieve a higher number of unit test in a more atomic fashion which helps to reduce the cost of impact when modifying code. Another issue I see is we are having single public method calling several privates methods has the consequence of having multiple unit tests harder to maintain. The difficulty is that private methods need to be set in a particular state to achieve specific testing paths. Not only it increases the time to create tests, since it requires a larger comprehension of the code, but make them fragile to changes. A single change in a private method could result of failing other tests when it should not. This kill encapsulation, which is present in TypeScript not in JavaScript. However, the big drawback is that everything can be used outside your class which might not be your real intention. Pattern 2 — Variation 1 separating the logic into classes and interface This second pattern is a better pattern than the previous one, but it comes with a cost of having more code to write. Common sense here need to be used about when to use it or not. The way to keep having public method and still being able to unit tests the code is by separating the code with a level of abstraction by dividing the logic into public classes. For example, you are creating a class that has a private method to sort a collection. Instead of having that logic into a private method, you extract the code into a SortByXYZ class which can inherit a ISortableCollectionWhatEver, then your class is injected by the concrete implementation during instantiation. The class uses that abstraction inside its methods. Pattern 2 — Variation 2 no interface abstraction Imagine a class named ClassA that is having private method to render a title. Instead of having all the logic into a private method to render the title, we also created a Title class that has a public render. This way, we can test the TitleClass without having to care about ClassA implementation. This is an example about how to split logic into classes. This is also a mix between the first pattern since you can have more public method in each class too. For example, the TitleClass could have a generateTitleFormat method which could be public which would allow to create unit test on the formatting even if this one is only used by Render. See that solution has hardcoded instanciation of class which are as cohesive that the variation 1. The main goal is not only to be able to unit test easily but also to be able to have cohesive classes that are easy to understand and can also be reusable. They are others pattern too available. Just keep in mind to keep it simples, easy to understand and easy to test.

Unit Testing with TypeScript – 3 Tricks to help you with private method


I already posted about how to write unit tests for private method with TypeScript about one year ago. Few days ago, I had the same discussion that I had in my previous team concerning private method. The situation is similar. At first, it may sound that we are going inside those private methods, therefore we are doing proper unit testing. The problem by going through intermediate methods to access the one we want to test is that any change on intermediate methods will make multiple test to fail. When a unit tests fail, the goal is to know which unit of your code is failing. Imagine the situation where you have class A that has method a1a2a3. You want to to unit test a3but the only entry point is a1 which is the only method public. This one call a2who call in some particular situation a3. You have multiple conditions in a3 and you evaluate that you need 5 unit tests. The problem is that if a1 or a2 change in the future that all these 5 tests may fail, when they should not. At that point, most people understand the situation and agree to test the private methods. However, there is some good ways to do it and some bad ways. The worst way to do it to cast the class A to be of type any and call a3 directly. Something like :. The problem with the above code is that when you will refactor a3 to have a better name that no tool will find out this instance. More, this open the door to access private fields or inject new functions and fields to the class. At the end, it become a nightmare to maintain. We are using TypeScript to be strongly typed, our tests should continue to be as strong. In the previous article I wrote, I talked about 2 patterns. The first one is about working around encapsulation with an interface. The second had two variations. The first pattern is that class A should have an interface IA that is used everywhere. IA would only expose the method a1.

How to unit test private method in TypeScript (part 2)


Traditional JavaScript uses functions and prototype-based inheritance to build up reusable components, but this may feel a bit awkward to programmers more comfortable with an object-oriented approach, where classes inherit functionality and objects are built from these classes. In TypeScript, we allow developers to use these techniques now, and compile them down to JavaScript that works across all major browsers and platforms, without having to wait for the next version of JavaScript. We declare a new class Greeter. This class has three members: a property called greetinga constructor, and a method greet. In the last line we construct an instance of the Greeter class using new. This calls into the constructor we defined earlier, creating a new object with the Greeter shape, and running the constructor to initialize it. In TypeScript, we can use common object-oriented patterns. One of the most fundamental patterns in class-based programming is being able to extend existing classes to create new ones using inheritance. This example shows the most basic inheritance feature: classes inherit properties and methods from base classes. Here, Dog is a derived class that derives from the Animal base class using the extends keyword. Derived classes are often called subclassesand base classes are often called superclasses. Because Dog extends the functionality from Animalwe were able to create an instance of Dog that could both bark and move. Again, we see the extends keywords used to create two new subclasses of Animal : Horse and Snake. One difference from the prior example is that each derived class that contains a constructor function must call super which will execute the constructor of the base class. This is an important rule that TypeScript will enforce. The example also shows how to override methods in the base class with methods that are specialized for the subclass. Here both Snake and Horse create a move method that overrides the move from Animalgiving it functionality specific to each class. Note that even though tom is declared as an Animalsince its value is a Horsecalling tom. In TypeScript, each member is public by default. You may still mark a member public explicitly. We could have written the Animal class from the previous section in the following way:. This syntax is built into the JavaScript runtime and can have better guarantees about the isolation of each private field.

Correct Answer

TypeScript includes the keywords public, protected, and private to control access to the members of a class such as properties or methods. Public class members are visible from within and outside the class, protected are visible form the class and its descendants, and private are visible from within the class only. The TypeScript compiler properly reports an error at the last line where I tried to access the private variable ssn. But this should have been marked as a warning, because the TypeScript compiler generates the JavaScript code anyway, which looks like this:. As you see all traces of privacy have been removed, the property ssn has been exposed to the outside world as every other Property on the Person object. But it is what it is. So when you use the private keyword in TypeScript, keep in mind that it just suggests you to be nice and not access it directly, but write public getter and setter methods instead. Having said that, I still like TypeScript. Developing in TypeScript is clearly more productive than in JavaScript. For more TypeScript articles go here. IMO, protected variables are useless in any object—oriented language. You can save this code in a ts file and compile it with tsc on the command line. Just tried again, here is the results: Command line: shows error, but anyway compiles to js. Looks like Visual Studio uses this flag by default. Great commentary on Typescript and I like your brutal honesty that once compiled, the JS is exposed, so your property may not be that private! Typescript is a great new compiler for JavaScript and I love the much better debugging capabilities. I love your P. Especially in TS using private attributes is kind of awkward for the reason you explained above and also because it makes inheritance a big pain constructors with different param names for example. The closure is created on the Person function and exists within it. To truly create a private variable on the instances, closures need to be created on the instances, like…. You are commenting using your WordPress. You are commenting using your Google account. You are commenting using your Twitter account. You are commenting using your Facebook account. Notify me of new comments via email. Notify me of new posts via email. Skip to content TypeScript includes the keywords public, protected, and private to control access to the members of a class such as properties or methods. Share this: Twitter Facebook. Thanks, Dmitry! This is the flag I was looking for. Updated the blog. Leave a Reply Cancel reply Enter your comment here Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:. Email required Address never made public. Name required. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use. To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy.

Testing private methods using jmockit.



Comments on “Typescript test private method

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>