JUnit5 support for the existing soft-assertions support (Expect.create JUnit4 Rule) #893

Activity

1. astubbs

   changed the title [-]Nicer way to support soft assertions (Expect.create) in JUnit5?[/-] [+]Nicer way to support soft assertions (Expect.create junit4 Rule) in JUnit5?[/+] on Jul 27, 2021
2. cpovirk commented on Jul 27, 2021

   

   cpovirk

   on Jul 27, 2021

   Member

   More actions

   Thanks. As you've seen, JUnit 5 is a giant TODO for us, one that we're unlikely to carve off time for in the near future :(

   I can say one slightly encouraging thing, which is that your proposal looks useful even to non-JUnit-5 users. (Maybe we've even heard requests for it from such users? I can't seem to find any offhand, though.) Then I can say one more discouraging thing, which is that we have had a proposal open inside Google for something like this for a couple years, and we haven't acted on it. Now, that proposal was more about adding context to a group of assertions:

   try (TruthContext ctx = Truth.addFailureMessage("foo %s", bar)) {
     ...
   }
   

   If we take into account that such a feature could support all of...

   • context to add to failure messages
   • Expect-style failure collection for...
     • users of JUnit 5 (and other non-JUnit-4 frameworks)
     • users of any framework who simply want to group assertions at a smaller scope than a whole test

   ...then that provides at least a little more motivation.

   Still probably not a big priority for us, given that Truth itself continues not to be a big priority for us, sadly.
3. cpovirk

   added

   P3not schedulednot scheduled

   type=additionA new featureA new feature

   on Jul 27, 2021
4. ephemient commented on Aug 17, 2021

   

   ephemient

   on Aug 17, 2021

   Last edited by ephemient

   More actions

   I created PR #706 over a year ago which enables

   @Test
   public void test(StandardSubjectBuilder expect) {
     expect.that(1).isEqualTo(2);
     expect.that(-1).isGreaterThan(0);
   }

   in JUnit 5. I think that makes sense if you're actually using JUnit 5, but if you want to use it in any test framework, then your ThingyThing seems reasonable.
5. astubbs commented on Sep 2, 2021

   

   astubbs

   on Sep 2, 2021

   Author

   More actions

   @ephemient that seems great! Perhaps the two could be merged to enable both options...

   @cpovirk have you seen #706 ?
6. ddaeyeonkim commented on Oct 1, 2021

   

   ddaeyeonkim

   on Oct 1, 2021

   Last edited by ddaeyeonkim

   More actions

   My solution Inspired by ThingyThing.

   class ExpectExtension : BeforeEachCallback, AfterEachCallback, InvocationInterceptor,
                           ParameterResolver {
   
       private var _expect: Expect? = null
   
       val expect: Expect
           get() = _expect!!
   
       override fun beforeEach(context: ExtensionContext) {
           _expect = Expect.create()
       }
   
       override fun interceptTestMethod(
           invocation: InvocationInterceptor.Invocation<Void>,
           invocationContext: ReflectiveInvocationContext<Method>,
           extensionContext: ExtensionContext
       ) {
           _expect?.apply(
               object : Statement() {
                   override fun evaluate() {
                       invocation.proceed()
                   }
               },
               Description.EMPTY,
           )?.evaluate()
       }
   
       override fun afterEach(context: ExtensionContext) {
           _expect = null
       }
   
       override fun supportsParameter(
           parameterContext: ParameterContext,
           extensionContext: ExtensionContext
       ): Boolean {
           val paramType = parameterContext.parameter.type
           return paramType is Type && paramType == Expect::class.java
       }
   
       override fun resolveParameter(
           parameterContext: ParameterContext,
           extensionContext: ExtensionContext
       ): Any {
           return expect
       }
   }

   A.

   @Test
   @ExtendWith(ExpectExtension::class)
   fun test(expect: Expect) {
       expect.that<Int>(1).isEqualTo(2)
       expect.that<Int>(1).isEqualTo(3)
       expect.that<Int>(1).isEqualTo(4)
   }

   B.

   @JvmField
   @RegisterExtension
   val extension = ExpectExtension()
   
   @Test
   fun test2() {
       extension.expect.that<Int>(1).isEqualTo(2)
       extension.expect.that<Int>(1).isEqualTo(3)
       extension.expect.that<Int>(1).isEqualTo(4)
   }
   
   @Test
   fun test3(expect: Expect) {
       expect.that<Int>(1).isEqualTo(2)
       expect.that<Int>(1).isEqualTo(3)
       expect.that<Int>(1).isEqualTo(4)
   }

   I look forward to any form of Expect Extension for JUnit5 being added in the future!

   🎉React with 🎉1Reacted by Antony Stubbs
7. cpovirk commented on Oct 19, 2021

   

   cpovirk

   on Oct 19, 2021

   Member

   More actions

   As belatedly noted on #894, anything that we label as P3 has no timeline for being reviewed :( We hope to eventually schedule some more time for Truth (especially for features that could work well in Kotlin, like this one), but there are no plans yet.

   (Another thing we should do: Figure out if this feature request and #266 represent different requests or if they could be merged.)
8. cpovirk

   changed the title [-]Nicer way to support soft assertions (Expect.create junit4 Rule) in JUnit5?[/-] [+]JUnit5 support for the existing soft-assertions support (Expect.create JUnit4 Rule)[/+] on Feb 5, 2024