I am using AssertJ library to perform assertions in my test. In this case I want to test if every Date object in list is after other date.
So I can obviously do the following:
Date dateOne = new Date(someTimestamp);
Date dateTwo = new Date(otherTimestamp);
Assertions.assertThat(dateOne).isAfter(dateTwo);
No questions about it.
But what if I want to test every element of list to make sure that all of them are after given date.
Date dateOne = new Date(someTimestamp);
Date dateTwo = new Date(otherTimestamp);
Date dateThree = new Date(fooBarTimestamp);
List<Date> dates = Arrays.asList(dateOne, dateTwo);
//and here I want to make sure that all Dates in dates are after dateThree
I managed this by creating custom org.assertj.core.api.Condition and used this syntax:
Assertions.assertThat(dates).is(allAfterDate(dateThree));
but the comparator does look very neat and what most important, my SonarQube is complaining that this signature:
Condition<List<? extends Date>> allAfterDate(final Date dateToCompare) {...}
Is breaking Generic wildcard types should not be used in return parameters rule. I tend to believe in SonarQube if I am not sure that this is a rule that I can break this time. And I am not sure.
I like using SoftAssertions so the walkaround would be to use:
SoftAssertions assertions = new SoftAssertions();
dates.forEach( date -> {
assertions.assertThat(date).isAfter(dateThree);
});
assertions.assertAll();
But I just cannot feel that this should be possible to use this cool AssertJ syntax that most devs like that much ;-)
Is there a way that I can do something similar to this?
Assertions.assertThat(dates).everySingleElement().isAfter(dateThree);
And if this is not possible what would be the best and cleanest way to do this?
(And I know I can supress sonar with //NOSONAR, I just don't want to)
Try allSatisfy:
assertThat(dates).allSatisfy(date -> assertThat(date).isAfter(dateThree));
hope it helps and is a cool enough syntax for you ;-)