I greatly favor AssertJ-core's `assertThat` and `assertThatThrownBy`. Decoupling is nice, but the reported failure information that AssertJ includes makes investigating failures initially much easier. That, and method-chaining assertions and (rarely) soft-assertions are useful features.
On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 12:32 PM, Dale Emery <dem...@pivotal.io> wrote: > Between JUnit and AssertJ, my preference is AssertJ, for two reasons. > First is AssertJ’s pervasiveness in Geode. Second, it decouples assertions > from the testing framework (in support of my secret desire to move to JUnit > 5). > > Cheers, > Dale > > > On Aug 20, 2018, at 11:49 AM, Mark Hanson <mhan...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > In the course fo fixing some tests, I have found that the existing Geode > asserts are deprecated. In wanting to leave the code as clean of > deprecations as possible, I have come to the inevitable quandary. Which > Assert should we be using? JUnit or Assertj? I am happy with either though > I will note that JUnit Assert does not seem to have a fail where you can > pass in the exception, which is used a lot in Geode. I look forward to an > answer. > > > > Thanks, > > Mark > > > > > > — > Dale Emery > dem...@pivotal.io > >
