Implemented BeSingle and HaveCount for XElement #1681 #1684
Conversation
|
Thanks for the feedback. Hopefully I understood them correctly. Now everything should be fine. |
| /// <param name="becauseArgs"> | ||
| /// Zero or more objects to format using the placeholders in <paramref name="because" />. | ||
| /// </param> | ||
| public AndConstraint<XDocumentAssertions> HaveSingleElement(XName expected, string because = "", params object[] becauseArgs) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should return a AndWhichConstraint<XDocumentAssertions, XElement> like HaveElement.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And use the Which that AndWhichConstraint exposes in your test
| } | ||
|
|
||
| Guard.ThrowIfArgumentIsNull(expected, nameof(expected), | ||
| "Cannot assert the document has an element count if the element name is <null>*"); |
| "Expected {context:subject} to have root element with child {0}{reason}, but it has no root element.", | ||
| expected.ToString()); | ||
|
|
||
| var xElements = Subject.Root.Elements(expected); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If HaveElementCount is called inside an AssertionScope the assertion above above will not fail immediately, so Subject.Root can be null here.
See e.g. XElementAssertions.HaveValue for an example of how to handle this.
| </parent>"); | ||
|
|
||
| // Act | ||
| Action act = () => document.Should().HaveSingleElement("child"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You could also validate that because and becauseArgs are properly passed along in this test.
See e.g. XDocumentAssertionSpecs.When_the_expected_element_is_null_it_fails
| * Adding new overloads to all `GreaterOrEqualTo` and `LessOrEqualTo` assertions, adding the word `Than` - [#1673](https://github.com/fluentassertions/fluentassertions/pull/1673) | ||
| * `BeAsync()` and `NotBeAsync()` are now also available on `MethodInfoSelectorAssertions` - [#1700](https://github.com/fluentassertions/fluentassertions/pull/1700) | ||
|
|
||
| * Added `HaveSingleElement` and `HaveElementCount` for `XDocument` - [#1681](https://github.com/fluentassertions/fluentassertions/pull/1684) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| * Added `HaveSingleElement` and `HaveElementCount` for `XDocument` - [#1681](https://github.com/fluentassertions/fluentassertions/pull/1684) | |
| * Added `HaveSingleElement` and `HaveElementCount` for `XDocument` - [#1684](https://github.com/fluentassertions/fluentassertions/pull/1684) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I suggested some improvements to the test names to avoid violating rule 4 of https://www.continuousimprover.com/2021/10/laws-test-driven-development.html
| /// <param name="becauseArgs"> | ||
| /// Zero or more objects to format using the placeholders in <paramref name="because" />. | ||
| /// </param> | ||
| public AndConstraint<XDocumentAssertions> HaveSingleElement(XName expected, string because = "", params object[] becauseArgs) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And use the Which that AndWhichConstraint exposes in your test
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /// <summary> | ||
| /// Asserts that the <see cref="XDocument.Root"/> element of the current <see cref="XDocument"/> has a the specified <paramref name="count"/> of |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's a typo around "has a the specified"
| public AndConstraint<XDocumentAssertions> HaveElementCount(XName expected, int count, string because = "", | ||
| params object[] becauseArgs) | ||
| { | ||
| if (Subject is null) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The subject being null is actually something that could happen in a failing test, so I think you should use the normal ForCondition logic.
| #region HaveSingleElement | ||
|
|
||
| [Fact] | ||
| public void When_asserting_document_has_a_single_child_element_and_it_does_it_should_succeed() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🔧 I suggest to keep the name more functional and concise: A_single_expected_child_element_with_the_specified_name_should_be_accepted
| } | ||
|
|
||
| [Fact] | ||
| public void When_asserting_document_has_single_child_element_but_it_does_have_two_it_should_fail() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🔧 Suggestion: Multiple_child_elements_with_the_specified_name_should_fail_the_test
| } | ||
|
|
||
| [Fact] | ||
| public void When_asserting_a_null_xDocument_to_have_a_single_element_it_should_fail() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🔧 Suggestion: Cannot_ensure_a_single_element_if_the_document_is_null
|
@ABergBN do you still intend to finish this PR? |
IMPORTANT
AcceptApiChanges.ps1/AcceptApiChanges.sh.Implemented the two needed methods for checking the counting on XElement (#1681)