Implemented ExcludingMembersNamed #183
Conversation
4784764 to
e9af95a
Compare
|
Thank you for your contribution! 🎉 Out of curiosity: The same as proposed as in FA? |
Src/AwesomeAssertions/Equivalency/Selection/ExcludeMemberByNameSelectionRule.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
Ah yes.. just forgot: also please take care of the release notes, api snapshots and (if applicable) the docs for this change. |
Src/AwesomeAssertions/Equivalency/SelfReferenceEquivalencyOptions.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Src/AwesomeAssertions/Equivalency/SelfReferenceEquivalencyOptions.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Add followed by the changes to
I would add an example here: AwesomeAssertions/docs/_pages/objectgraphs.md Line 168 in aaa75a2 |
| /// <summary> | ||
| /// Selection rule that removes a particular member from the structural comparison if its name matches the specified criteria. | ||
| /// </summary> | ||
| internal class ExcludeMemberByNameSelectionRule : IMemberSelectionRule |
e9af95a to
4bc0f8d
Compare
4bc0f8d to
fc2c7a5
Compare
fc2c7a5 to
4c1e44e
Compare
Tests/AwesomeAssertions.Equivalency.Specs/SelectionRulesSpecs.Excluding.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Src/AwesomeAssertions/Equivalency/Selection/ExcludeMemberByNameSelectionRule.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Tests/AwesomeAssertions.Equivalency.Specs/SelectionRulesSpecs.Excluding.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
4c1e44e to
27c9a7d
Compare
27c9a7d to
56580c8
Compare
Src/AwesomeAssertions/Equivalency/Selection/ExcludeMemberByNameSelectionRule.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
The discussion about |
|
| .ExcludingMembersNamed("Name")); | ||
|
|
||
| // Assert | ||
| act.Should().NotThrow(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We usually don't assert that something which shouldn't throw to NotThrow, because when it fails it fails anyways
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So this test would become
[Fact]
public void A_member_excluded_by_name_is_ignored()
{
// Arrange
var subject = new
{
Id = 1,
Name = "John",
Age = 13
};
var customer = new
{
Id = 1,
Name = "Jack",
Age = 13
};
// Act / Assert
subject.Should().BeEquivalentTo(customer, options => options
.ExcludingMembersNamed("Name"));
}But this test isn't necessary at all, because it is a duplicate of When_excluding_member_names_it_should_pass_if_only_the_excluded_members_are_different.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@IT-VBFK We actually have tests which use Should().NotThrow(). I guess those are older ones. Since we agree here, I'll change those tests to match our preferences.
| // Assert | ||
| act.Should().Throw<ArgumentException>() | ||
| .WithParameterName("memberNames") | ||
| .WithMessage("At least one member name must be specified.\nParameter name: memberNames"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just assert the shape of the message will do, like:
| .WithMessage("At least one member name must be specified.\nParameter name: memberNames"); | |
| .WithMessage("*one member*must be specified*memberNames*"); |
| // Assert | ||
| act.Should().Throw<ArgumentException>() | ||
| .WithParameterName("memberNames") | ||
| .WithMessage("Collection contains a null or empty value\nParameter name: memberNames"); |
| @@ -130,6 +130,12 @@ orderDto.Should().BeEquivalentTo(order, options => | |||
| options.Excluding(o => o.Products[1].Status)); | |||
| ``` | |||
|
|
|||
| You can also exclude all members with of a specific name: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| You can also exclude all members with of a specific name: | |
| You can also exclude all members with of a specific name anywhere in the object graph: |
| .ExcludingMembersNamed("Name")); | ||
|
|
||
| // Assert | ||
| act.Should().NotThrow(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So this test would become
[Fact]
public void A_member_excluded_by_name_is_ignored()
{
// Arrange
var subject = new
{
Id = 1,
Name = "John",
Age = 13
};
var customer = new
{
Id = 1,
Name = "Jack",
Age = 13
};
// Act / Assert
subject.Should().BeEquivalentTo(customer, options => options
.ExcludingMembersNamed("Name"));
}But this test isn't necessary at all, because it is a duplicate of When_excluding_member_names_it_should_pass_if_only_the_excluded_members_are_different.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| [Fact] | ||
| public void When_an_empty_or_null_member_name_is_passed_in_memeber_names_parameter_it_should_throw() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
typo: _member_names_ (same in other method names)
| Field2 = "ipsum" | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| // Act |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
// Act / Assert
class1.Should().BeEquivalentTo(class2,
opts => opts.ExcludingMembersNamed("Field3", "Property1"));| ## Unreleased | ||
|
|
||
| ### What's new | ||
| * Add new assertions for strings: `[Not]BeParsableInto` - [#185](https://github.com/AwesomeAssertions/AwesomeAssertions/pull/185) | ||
|
|
||
| ### Improvements | ||
| * Add `ExcludingMembersNamed` to `BeEquivalentTo` which enables excluding members with specified name - [#183](https://github.com/AwesomeAssertions/AwesomeAssertions/pull/183) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would move that to What's new, sorry for the wrong proposal.
Tests/AwesomeAssertions.Equivalency.Specs/SelectionRulesSpecs.Excluding.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
@weitzhandler @cbersch Are there any undiscussed things left, or can we move on? |
For me only the unresolved conversations, with minor changes in tests. |
Fixes #182
IMPORTANT
./build.sh --target spellcheckor.\build.ps1 --target spellcheckbefore pushing and check the good outcome