rspec/rules/S3415/java/rule.adoc

34 lines
1.4 KiB
Plaintext

The standard assertions library methods such as ``++org.junit.Assert.assertEquals++``, and ``++org.junit.Assert.assertSame++`` expect the first argument to be the expected value and the second argument to be the actual value. For AssertJ, it's the other way around, the argument of ``++org.assertj.core.api.Assertions.assertThat++`` is the actual value, and the subsequent calls contain the expected values. Swap them, and your test will still have the same outcome (succeed/fail when it should) but the error messages will be confusing.
This rule raises an issue when the actual argument to an assertions library method is a hard-coded value and the expected argument is not.
Supported frameworks:
* JUnit4
* JUnit5
* https://assertj.github.io/doc/[AssertJ]
== Noncompliant Code Example
----
org.junit.Assert.assertEquals(runner.exitCode(), 0, "Unexpected exit code"); // Noncompliant; Yields error message like: Expected:<-1>. Actual:<0>.
org.assertj.core.api.Assertions.assertThat(0).isEqualTo(runner.exitCode()); // Noncompliant
----
== Compliant Solution
----
org.junit.Assert.assertEquals(0, runner.exitCode(), "Unexpected exit code");
org.assertj.core.api.Assertions.assertThat(runner.exitCode()).isEqualTo(0);
----
ifdef::env-github,rspecator-view[]
'''
== Comments And Links
(visible only on this page)
include::../comments-and-links.adoc[]
endif::env-github,rspecator-view[]