Cache::get() can't be mocked

[tillkruss]

Issue #9729 and #10480 have been closed without fix or explanation.

The code example from the official "Testing" docs not work: http://laravel.com/docs/5.1/testing#mocking-facades

Either the official docs need to be updated, or the Cache facade adjusted to make it work.

Cache::shouldReceive('get')
   ->once()
   ->with('key')
   ->andReturn('value');

Throws:

InvalidArgumentException: get() cannot be mocked as it a protected method and mocking protected methods is not allowed for this mock

[GrahamCampbell]

That's because you don't need to mock the get method on the cache repository, because there isn't one to mock.

[GrahamCampbell]

Yes, the docs are totally wrong here, sorry. We're open to PRs though. :)

[GrahamCampbell]

Issue #9729 and #10480 have been closed without fix or explanation.

Well that's totally untrue.

I added a reason straight away.

You can't mock a manager class like that I'm afraid. The get call there is a __callStatic followed by a __call. You can only mock facades if the next call from __callStatic is a real method.

[taylorotwell]

I've fixed this in laravel/framework by instructing mockery to allow mocking protected methods on the Facade base class. Fix should be released on next tag.

[tillkruss]

Thanks! 👍

[apsdsm]

Was just hitting this problem - thanks for fixing :)

[jkatz50]

Using laravel 5.2 and still having issues with Mockery Cache:
BadMethodCallException: Method Mockery_1_Illuminate_Cache_CacheManager::put() does not exist on this mock object

[tillkruss]

That's a different error message.

[priyanshuchhazed]

I'm facing a similar issue with Mockery Cache:
BadMethodCallException: Method Mockery_0_Illuminate_Cache_CacheManager::driver() does not exist on this mock object

[GrahamCampbell]

It's not a bug as such, it's because you're being naive with the mocking. The cache manager is only a proxy, so you can't mock methods that you think exist, because they don't. You'll need to mock the __call method, or, mock the underlying "cache repository instance".

[richartkeil]

To provide a quick solution for the described problem of @priyanshuchhazed (even if it's not issue related and quite some time ago):

In a normal Unit test mocking through Cache::shouldReceive('...') works perfectly fine.

However if you write an integration test faking an HTTP request you need to condition the mock like this:

$cacheDriver = app('cache')->driver();
Cache::shouldReceive('driver')->andReturn($cacheDriver);

[sergsoares]

To provide a quick solution for the described problem of @priyanshuchhazed (even if it's not issue related and quite some time ago):

In a normal Unit test mocking through Cache::shouldReceive('...') works perfectly fine.

However if you write an integration test faking an HTTP request you need to condition the mock like this:

$cacheDriver = app('cache')->driver();
Cache::shouldReceive('driver')->andReturn($cacheDriver);

Work perfectly for me. Thanks

[hettiger]

It's not a bug as such, it's because you're being naive with the mocking. The cache manager is only a proxy, so you can't mock methods that you think exist, because they don't. You'll need to mock the __call method, or, mock the underlying "cache repository instance".

Here's what I've came up with reading your comment:

// arrange
$cacheRepository = Cache::driver();
$cacheRepositorySpy = Mockery::spy($cacheRepository);
Cache::swap($cacheRepositorySpy);

// act
$this->post(/* … */);

// assert
$cacheRepositorySpy->shouldHaveReceived('has');
$cacheRepositorySpy->shouldHaveReceived('get');

– or –

$partialCacheMock = Mockery::mock(Cache::driver())->makePartial();
$partialCacheMock->shouldReceive('put')->once();
Cache::swap($partialCacheMock);

Maybe this is helpful for others that come across this issue…

Actually it seems to be working just fine. I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to make Cache::spy() return the equivalent of my $cacheRepositorySpy from the example above.

It took me hours to figure this out. Documentation and / or API clearly needs an improvement to be honest.

[hettiger]

Somehow I keep coming back to this and I'm always happy that I left this comment for others and future self. 😄