[Junit-trackers] [ junit-Feature Requests-1435782 ] dynamically check for arrays and Collections

[SourceForge.net <no...@so...>]

Feature Requests item #1435782, was opened at 2006-02-21 10:05
Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by sf-robot
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=1435782&group_id=15278

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: None
Group: None
>Status: Closed
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: J. David Beutel (david_beutel)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: dynamically check for arrays and Collections

Initial Comment:
With JDK 1.5 generics and auto-boxing, I'll use 
Collections more often.  So, I think it would be useful
to do array-like assertEquals() on ordered Collections.

Building on my previous patches, I changed
assertEquals() to check for arrays dynamically, and
handle ordered Collections like it does arrays.  Sets
(but not SortedSets) are handled as before.

I just tried this, but I haven't used it yet, so it's
only experimental.  It could be simplified if the
output format were changed.

versions: junit 4.0, JDK 1.5.0_06, ant 1.6.5, Fedora
Core 3.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: SourceForge Robot (sf-robot)
Date: 2009-12-01 02:20

Message:
This Tracker item was closed automatically by the system. It was
previously set to a Pending status, and the original submitter
did not respond within 14 days (the time period specified by
the administrator of this Tracker).

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: David Saff (dsaff)
Date: 2009-11-16 17:52

Message:
This tracker is being shut down.  Please move this item to
http://github.com/KentBeck/junit/issues

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: J. David Beutel (david_beutel)
Date: 2006-02-22 09:16

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=484527

Taking the next step in this experiment, I changed
assertEquals() to check for Float and Double dynamically. 
Now the delta works on Float and Double array elements, and
there are no more primitive parameters for expected and
actual.  To avoid ambiguity, I had to rename the
assertEquals() taking a delta (to assertEqualsDelta()).

I also added handling for arrays of primitives.

This is just experimental, and needs some review, but I
think it's an interesting idea.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=365278&aid=1435782&group_id=15278