如果抽象类适合于您的实现，则测试(如上所述)派生的具体类。你的假设是正确的。

为了避免将来的混乱，请注意这个具体的测试类不是模拟的，而是假的。

严格来说，mock由以下特征定义:

A mock is used in place of each and every dependency of the subject class being tested. A mock is a pseudo-implementation of an interface (you may recall that as a general rule, dependencies should be declared as interfaces; testability is one primary reason for this) Behaviors of the mock's interface members -- whether methods or properties -- are supplied at test-time (again, by use of a mocking framework). This way, you avoid coupling of the implementation being tested with the implementation of its dependencies (which should all have their own discrete tests).

遵循@patrick-desjardins的回答，我实现了抽象和它的实现类@Test，如下所示:

抽象类- ABC.java

import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.List;

public abstract class ABC {

    abstract String sayHello();

    public List<String> getList() {
        final List<String> defaultList = new ArrayList<>();
        defaultList.add("abstract class");
        return defaultList;
    }
}

由于抽象类不能被实例化，但它们可以被子类化，具体类DEF.java如下:

public class DEF extends ABC {

    @Override
    public String sayHello() {
        return "Hello!";
    }
}

测试类来测试抽象方法和非抽象方法:

import org.junit.Before;
import static org.hamcrest.MatcherAssert.assertThat;
import static org.hamcrest.Matchers.empty;
import static org.hamcrest.Matchers.is;
import static org.hamcrest.Matchers.not;
import static org.hamcrest.Matchers.contains;
import java.util.Collection;
import java.util.List;
import static org.hamcrest.Matchers.equalTo;

import org.junit.Test;

public class DEFTest {

    private DEF def;

    @Before
    public void setup() {
        def = new DEF();
    }

    @Test
    public void add(){
        String result = def.sayHello();
        assertThat(result, is(equalTo("Hello!")));
    }

    @Test
    public void getList(){
        List<String> result = def.getList();
        assertThat((Collection<String>) result, is(not(empty())));
        assertThat(result, contains("abstract class"));
    }
}

如果抽象类适合于您的实现，则测试(如上所述)派生的具体类。你的假设是正确的。

为了避免将来的混乱，请注意这个具体的测试类不是模拟的，而是假的。

严格来说，mock由以下特征定义:

A mock is used in place of each and every dependency of the subject class being tested. A mock is a pseudo-implementation of an interface (you may recall that as a general rule, dependencies should be declared as interfaces; testability is one primary reason for this) Behaviors of the mock's interface members -- whether methods or properties -- are supplied at test-time (again, by use of a mocking framework). This way, you avoid coupling of the implementation being tested with the implementation of its dependencies (which should all have their own discrete tests).

为了专门对抽象类进行单元测试，您应该出于测试目的派生它，test base.method()的结果和继承时预期的行为。

你通过调用一个方法来测试它，所以通过实现一个抽象类来测试它……

首先，如果抽象类包含一些具体的方法，我认为你应该这样做，考虑这个例子

 public abstract class A 

 {

    public boolean method 1
    {
        // concrete method which we have to test.

    }


 }


 class B extends class A

 {

      @override
      public boolean method 1
      {
        // override same method as above.

      }


 } 


  class Test_A 

  {

    private static B b;  // reference object of the class B

    @Before
    public void init()

      {

      b = new B ();    

      }

     @Test
     public void Test_method 1

       {

       b.method 1; // use some assertion statements.

       }

   }

我反对“抽象”测试。我认为测试是一个具体的概念，没有抽象的概念。如果您有公共元素，请将它们放在辅助方法或类中供所有人使用。

至于测试抽象测试类，一定要问自己要测试的是什么。有几种方法，您应该找出适合您的场景的方法。您是否试图在子类中测试一个新方法?然后让您的测试只与该方法交互。测试基类中的方法吗?然后可能只针对该类有一个单独的fixture，并使用尽可能多的测试单独测试每个方法。