如何测试或模拟“ if__ name__ = =’__main__’”内容

假设我有一个包含以下内容的模块:

def main():
pass


if __name__ == "__main__":
main()

我想为下半部分编写一个单元测试(我想实现100% 的覆盖率)。我发现了执行导入/__name__设置机制的 Runpy内置模块，但是我不知道如何模拟或检查 主()函数是否被调用。

这是我目前为止尝试过的方法:

import runpy
import mock


@mock.patch('foobar.main')
def test_main(self, main):
runpy.run_module('foobar', run_name='__main__')
main.assert_called_once_with()
38155 次浏览
小开

You can do this using the imp module rather than the import statement. The problem with the import statement is that the test for '__main__' runs as part of the import statement before you get a chance to assign to runpy.__name__.

For example, you could use imp.load_source() like so:

import imp
runpy = imp.load_source('__main__', '/path/to/runpy.py')

The first parameter is assigned to __name__ of the imported module.

小开

One approach is to run the modules as scripts (e.g. os.system(...)) and compare their stdout and stderr output to expected values.

小开
最佳答案

I will choose another alternative which is to exclude the if __name__ == '__main__' from the coverage report , of course you can do that only if you already have a test case for your main() function in your tests.

As for why I choose to exclude rather than writing a new test case for the whole script is because if as I stated you already have a test case for your main() function the fact that you add an other test case for the script (just for having a 100 % coverage) will be just a duplicated one.

For how to exclude the if __name__ == '__main__' you can write a coverage configuration file and add in the section report:

[report]


exclude_lines =
if __name__ == .__main__.:

More info about the coverage configuration file can be found here.

Hope this can help.

小开

Whoa, I'm a little late to the party, but I recently ran into this issue and I think I came up with a better solution, so here it is...

I was working on a module that contained a dozen or so scripts all ending with this exact copypasta:

if __name__ == '__main__':
if '--help' in sys.argv or '-h' in sys.argv:
print(__doc__)
else:
sys.exit(main())

Not horrible, sure, but not testable either. My solution was to write a new function in one of my modules:

def run_script(name, doc, main):
"""Act like a script if we were invoked like a script."""
if name == '__main__':
if '--help' in sys.argv or '-h' in sys.argv:
sys.stdout.write(doc)
else:
sys.exit(main())

and then place this gem at the end of each script file:

run_script(__name__, __doc__, main)

Technically, this function will be run unconditionally whether your script was imported as a module or ran as a script. This is ok however because the function doesn't actually do anything unless the script is being ran as a script. So code coverage sees the function runs and says "yes, 100% code coverage!" Meanwhile, I wrote three tests to cover the function itself:

@patch('mymodule.utils.sys')
def test_run_script_as_import(self, sysMock):
"""The run_script() func is a NOP when name != __main__."""
mainMock = Mock()
sysMock.argv = []
run_script('some_module', 'docdocdoc', mainMock)
self.assertEqual(mainMock.mock_calls, [])
self.assertEqual(sysMock.exit.mock_calls, [])
self.assertEqual(sysMock.stdout.write.mock_calls, [])


@patch('mymodule.utils.sys')
def test_run_script_as_script(self, sysMock):
"""Invoke main() when run as a script."""
mainMock = Mock()
sysMock.argv = []
run_script('__main__', 'docdocdoc', mainMock)
mainMock.assert_called_once_with()
sysMock.exit.assert_called_once_with(mainMock())
self.assertEqual(sysMock.stdout.write.mock_calls, [])


@patch('mymodule.utils.sys')
def test_run_script_with_help(self, sysMock):
"""Print help when the user asks for help."""
mainMock = Mock()
for h in ('-h', '--help'):
sysMock.argv = [h]
run_script('__main__', h*5, mainMock)
self.assertEqual(mainMock.mock_calls, [])
self.assertEqual(sysMock.exit.mock_calls, [])
sysMock.stdout.write.assert_called_with(h*5)

Blam! Now you can write a testable main(), invoke it as a script, have 100% test coverage, and not need to ignore any code in your coverage report.

小开

My solution is to use imp.load_source() and force an exception to be raised early in main() by not providing a required CLI argument, providing a malformed argument, setting paths in such a way that a required file is not found, etc.

import imp
import os
import sys


def mainCond(testObj, srcFilePath, expectedExcType=SystemExit, cliArgsStr=''):
sys.argv = [os.path.basename(srcFilePath)] + (
[] if len(cliArgsStr) == 0 else cliArgsStr.split(' '))
testObj.assertRaises(expectedExcType, imp.load_source, '__main__', srcFilePath)

Then in your test class you can use this function like this:

def testMain(self):
mainCond(self, 'path/to/main.py', cliArgsStr='-d FailingArg')
小开

I found this solution helpful. Works well if you use a function to keep all your script code. The code will be handled as one code line. It doesn't matter if the entire line was executed for coverage counter (though this is not what you would actually actually expect by 100% coverage) The trick is also accepted pylint. ;-)

if __name__ == '__main__': \
main()
小开

Python 3 solution:

import os
from importlib.machinery import SourceFileLoader
from importlib.util import spec_from_loader, module_from_spec
from importlib import reload
from unittest import TestCase
from unittest.mock import MagicMock, patch
    



class TestIfNameEqMain(TestCase):
def test_name_eq_main(self):
loader = SourceFileLoader('__main__',
os.path.join(os.path.dirname(os.path.dirname(__file__)),
'__main__.py'))
with self.assertRaises(SystemExit) as e:
loader.exec_module(module_from_spec(spec_from_loader(loader.name, loader)))

Using the alternative solution of defining your own little function:

# module.py
def main():
if __name__ == '__main__':
return 'sweet'
return 'child of mine'

You can test with:

# Override the `__name__` value in your module to '__main__'
with patch('module_name.__name__', '__main__'):
import module_name
self.assertEqual(module_name.main(), 'sweet')


with patch('module_name.__name__', 'anything else'):
reload(module_name)
del module_name
import module_name
self.assertEqual(module_name.main(), 'child of mine')
小开

I did not want to exclude the lines in question, so based on this explanation of a solution, I implemented a simplified version of the alternate answer given here...

  1. I wrapped if __name__ == "__main__": in a function to make it easily testable, and then called that function to retain logic:
# myapp.module.py


def main():
pass


def init():
if __name__ == "__main__":
main()


init()
  1. I mocked the __name__ using unittest.mock to get at the lines in question:
from unittest.mock import patch, MagicMock
from myapp import module


def test_name_equals_main():
# Arrange
with patch.object(module, "main", MagicMock()) as mock_main:
with patch.object(module, "__name__", "__main__"):
# Act
module.init()


# Assert
mock_main.assert_called_once()

If you are sending arguments into the mocked function, like so,

if __name__ == "__main__":
main(main_args)

then you can use assert_called_once_with() for an even better test:

expected_args = ["expected_arg_1", "expected_arg_2"]
mock_main.assert_called_once_with(expected_args)

If desired, you can also add a return_value to the MagicMock() like so:

with patch.object(module, "main", MagicMock(return_value='foo')) as mock_main:
小开

If it's just to get the 100% and there is nothing "real" to test there, it is easier to ignore that line.

If you are using the regular coverage lib, you can just add a simple comment, and the line will be ignored in the coverage report.

if __name__ == '__main__':
main()  # pragma: no cover

https://coverage.readthedocs.io/en/coverage-4.3.3/excluding.html

Another comment by @ Taylor Edmiston also mentions it


提交答案