Skip to content

Custom assertions use primitive comparison, not assertions #133

Open
@Bananeweizen

Description

@Bananeweizen

https://assertj.github.io/doc/#assertj-core-custom-assertions-creation shows how to create custom assertion classes. One part that I find very confusing is this piece of code in the custom hasName assertion implementation:

    // check assertion logic
    if (!Objects.equals(actual.getName(), name)) {
      failWithMessage("Expected character's name to be <%s> but was <%s>", name, actual.getName());
    }

I would expect to reuse existing String assertions there, e.g. to write this instead:

    // check assertion logic
    Assertions.assertThat(actual.getName)
        .withFailMessage(() -> "Expected character's name to be <%s> but was <%s>", name, actual.getName())
        .isEqualTo(name);

Is there a good reason to not use other existing assertions there (like confusing the logic to shorten stack traces or similar internal things)? If yes, can we please document it? Otherwise, shouldn't we change the example code?

I typically do use existing assertions in my own assertions, and I have this nagging feeling of doing something wrong without knowing what exactly. :)

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

No labels
No labels

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

Milestone

No milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions