FluentAssertions - 如何使 ShouldBeEquivalentTo 比较空和 null 是否相等
FluentAssertions - how make ShouldBeEquivalentTo compare empty and null as equal
我正在使用 Fluent Assertion 库作为一些自定义序列化代码的单元测试的一部分,我正在寻找一种方法来强制 ShouldBeEquivalentTo 将 null 和空列表比较为相等。
基本上,我的测试类似于:
[Test]
public void Should_be_xxx()
{
ClassWithList one = new ClassWithList { Id = "ten", Items = null };
string serialized = Serialize(one);
ClassWithList two = Deserialize(serialized);
two.ShouldBeEquivalentTo(one);
}
然而,反序列化方法的一个特点是,如果输入数据中缺少集合类型,它会将反序列化的 class 上的 属性 设置为一个空列表,而不是比空。因此,非常简单,我最终遇到的情况是实例二 Items = new List<string>
而不是 null.
显然,我可以在比较之前设置 one.Items = new List<string>()
,但实际上我在这些方法中声明了大量复杂的域对象,我正在寻找一个通用的解决方案。换句话说,有谁知道如何通过以下测试:
public class ClassWithList
{
public string Id { get; set; }
public List<string> Items { get; set; }
}
[Test]
public void Should_be_xxx()
{
ClassWithList one = new ClassWithList { Id = "ten", Items = null };
ClassWithList two = new ClassWithList { Id = "ten", Items = new List<string>() };
two.ShouldBeEquivalentTo(one);
}
换句话说,我希望将以下测试应用于 class X 中的所有集合,作为比较等价性的一部分:
if (subject.Items == null)
{
expected.Items.Should().BeEmpty();
}
else
{
expected.Items.Should().BeEquivalentTo(subject.Items);
}
您必须实施自定义 'IEquivalencyStep' 或 u.se 'options.Using(自定义操作).WhenTypeIs(predicate).
根据上面 Dennis 提供的信息,我能够通过以下实际代码解决此问题:
public class ClassWithList
{
public string Id { get; set; }
public List<string> Items { get; set; }
public List<ClassWithList> Nested { get; set; }
}
[TestClass]
public class Test
{
[TestMethod]
public void Should_compare_null_to_empty()
{
ClassWithList one = new ClassWithList { Id = "ten", Items = null, Nested = new List<ClassWithList> { new ClassWithList { Id = "a" } } };
ClassWithList two = new ClassWithList { Id = "ten", Items = new List<string>(), Nested = new List<ClassWithList> { new ClassWithList { Id = "a", Items = new List<string>(), Nested = new List<ClassWithList> { } } } };
two.ShouldBeEquivalentTo(one, opt => opt
.Using<IEnumerable>(CheckList)
.When(info => typeof(IEnumerable).IsAssignableFrom(info.CompileTimeType)));
}
private void CheckList(IAssertionContext<IEnumerable> a)
{
if (a.Expectation == null)
{
a.Subject.Should().BeEmpty();
}
else
{
a.Subject.ShouldBeEquivalentTo(a.Expectation, opt => opt
.Using<IEnumerable>(CheckList)
.When(info => typeof(IEnumerable).IsAssignableFrom(info.CompileTimeType)));
}
}
}
创建 IAssertionRule
:
public class EnumerableNullEmptyEquivalenceRule : IAssertionRule
{
public bool AssertEquality(IEquivalencyValidationContext context)
{
// not applicable - return false
if (!typeof(IEnumerable).IsAssignableFrom(context.SelectedMemberInfo.MemberType)) return false;
return context.Expectation == null && ((IEnumerable)context.Subject).IsNullOrEmpty();
}
}
然后申请您的 BeEquivalentTo
电话:
actual.Should().BeEquivalentTo(expected, opt => opt.Using(new EnumerableNullEmptyEquivalenceRule()));
我正在使用 Fluent Assertion 库作为一些自定义序列化代码的单元测试的一部分,我正在寻找一种方法来强制 ShouldBeEquivalentTo 将 null 和空列表比较为相等。
基本上,我的测试类似于:
[Test]
public void Should_be_xxx()
{
ClassWithList one = new ClassWithList { Id = "ten", Items = null };
string serialized = Serialize(one);
ClassWithList two = Deserialize(serialized);
two.ShouldBeEquivalentTo(one);
}
然而,反序列化方法的一个特点是,如果输入数据中缺少集合类型,它会将反序列化的 class 上的 属性 设置为一个空列表,而不是比空。因此,非常简单,我最终遇到的情况是实例二 Items = new List<string>
而不是 null.
显然,我可以在比较之前设置 one.Items = new List<string>()
,但实际上我在这些方法中声明了大量复杂的域对象,我正在寻找一个通用的解决方案。换句话说,有谁知道如何通过以下测试:
public class ClassWithList
{
public string Id { get; set; }
public List<string> Items { get; set; }
}
[Test]
public void Should_be_xxx()
{
ClassWithList one = new ClassWithList { Id = "ten", Items = null };
ClassWithList two = new ClassWithList { Id = "ten", Items = new List<string>() };
two.ShouldBeEquivalentTo(one);
}
换句话说,我希望将以下测试应用于 class X 中的所有集合,作为比较等价性的一部分:
if (subject.Items == null)
{
expected.Items.Should().BeEmpty();
}
else
{
expected.Items.Should().BeEquivalentTo(subject.Items);
}
您必须实施自定义 'IEquivalencyStep' 或 u.se 'options.Using(自定义操作).WhenTypeIs(predicate).
根据上面 Dennis 提供的信息,我能够通过以下实际代码解决此问题:
public class ClassWithList
{
public string Id { get; set; }
public List<string> Items { get; set; }
public List<ClassWithList> Nested { get; set; }
}
[TestClass]
public class Test
{
[TestMethod]
public void Should_compare_null_to_empty()
{
ClassWithList one = new ClassWithList { Id = "ten", Items = null, Nested = new List<ClassWithList> { new ClassWithList { Id = "a" } } };
ClassWithList two = new ClassWithList { Id = "ten", Items = new List<string>(), Nested = new List<ClassWithList> { new ClassWithList { Id = "a", Items = new List<string>(), Nested = new List<ClassWithList> { } } } };
two.ShouldBeEquivalentTo(one, opt => opt
.Using<IEnumerable>(CheckList)
.When(info => typeof(IEnumerable).IsAssignableFrom(info.CompileTimeType)));
}
private void CheckList(IAssertionContext<IEnumerable> a)
{
if (a.Expectation == null)
{
a.Subject.Should().BeEmpty();
}
else
{
a.Subject.ShouldBeEquivalentTo(a.Expectation, opt => opt
.Using<IEnumerable>(CheckList)
.When(info => typeof(IEnumerable).IsAssignableFrom(info.CompileTimeType)));
}
}
}
创建 IAssertionRule
:
public class EnumerableNullEmptyEquivalenceRule : IAssertionRule
{
public bool AssertEquality(IEquivalencyValidationContext context)
{
// not applicable - return false
if (!typeof(IEnumerable).IsAssignableFrom(context.SelectedMemberInfo.MemberType)) return false;
return context.Expectation == null && ((IEnumerable)context.Subject).IsNullOrEmpty();
}
}
然后申请您的 BeEquivalentTo
电话:
actual.Should().BeEquivalentTo(expected, opt => opt.Using(new EnumerableNullEmptyEquivalenceRule()));