Use latest stable dependencies and update copyright year #702
Conversation
bmscomp
force-pushed
the
update/testng_depedency
branch
from
4317e6e to
3091afe
Compare
bmscomp
force-pushed
the
update/testng_depedency
branch
from
13b892f to
e1387e8
Compare
bmscomp
changed the title
bmscomp
changed the title
| @@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ public void testWithTwoGoodCDIProvider() throws Exception { | |||
| fw.write('\n'); | |||
| fw.write(DummyCDIProvider.class.getName()); | |||
| fw.close(); | |||
| Assert.assertTrue(CDI.current().getClass().equals(DummyCDIProvider.DummyCDI.class)); | |||
| Assert.assertEquals(DummyCDIProvider.DummyCDI.class, CDI.current().getClass()); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note that in TestNG, the order of parameters of assertEquals is opposite to JUnit: first goes the actual value, then the expected value. (Unless TestNG 7 changed their mind, but I find that unlikely.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll fix that you are right, I just checked the signature of it
static public void assertEquals(Object actual, Object expected) {
assertEquals(actual, expected, null);
}
@Ladicek isn't it the same, shouldn't have a transitive and reflective equals ? I mean both should work if A is equals to B then be must be equals A
Please tell me more about the context
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Ladicek isn't it the same, shouldn't have a transitive and reflective equals ? I mean both should work if A is equals to B then be must be equals A
As far as outcome of the test goes, this is true. However, the ordering matters in cases such as error reporting - then it tries to tell you something along the lines of what went wrong and which value was expected and which was observed instead and in that moment, ordering matters.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@manovotn is right on the money, this is about the possible error message being correct.
|
This is going to be obsoleted by my #710 PR. |
This pull request is aiming to keep a fresh and updated version of
testngdependency