Skip to content

Improve output for expected argument matchers - #806

Merged
dtchepak merged 2 commits into
nsubstitute:mainfrom
dtchepak:improve-output-for-expected-arg-match
Nov 30, 2024
Merged

Improve output for expected argument matchers#806
dtchepak merged 2 commits into
nsubstitute:mainfrom
dtchepak:improve-output-for-expected-arg-match

Conversation

@dtchepak

@dtchepak dtchepak commented May 5, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
  • Add IDescribeSpecification to allow custom arg matchers to provide custom output for "expected to receive" entries.
  • Fallback to ToString when IDescribeSpecification not implemented.
  • Update code comment docs accordingly.

Closes #796.

@dtchepak dtchepak mentioned this pull request May 5, 2024
Closed
@dtchepak
dtchepak force-pushed the improve-output-for-expected-arg-match branch 2 times, most recently from 957259f to e4bdaed Compare May 5, 2024 06:07
@dtchepak
dtchepak requested review from alexandrnikitin and zvirja May 5, 2024 06:08
rbeurskens
rbeurskens suggested changes May 5, 2024
View reviewed changes
Comment thread src/NSubstitute/Core/CallSpecification.cs Outdated
Comment thread src/NSubstitute/Core/CallSpecification.cs Outdated
Comment thread src/NSubstitute/Core/Arguments/ArgumentMatcher.cs Outdated
Comment thread src/NSubstitute/Core/Arguments/ArgumentMatcher.cs Outdated
@dtchepak
dtchepak requested a review from rbeurskens May 5, 2024 12:37
@dtchepak
dtchepak force-pushed the improve-output-for-expected-arg-match branch from aa3cd12 to 50401f7 Compare November 10, 2024 03:55
rbeurskens
rbeurskens reviewed Nov 10, 2024
View reviewed changes
Comment thread src/NSubstitute/Core/Arguments/ArgumentSpecification.cs.orig Outdated
@dtchepak
Improve output for expected argument matchers
90d93ec 
- Add IDescribeSpecification to allow custom arg matchers to provide
  custom output for "expected to receive" entries.
- Fallback to ToString when IDescribeSpecification not implemented.
- Update code comment docs accordingly.

Relates to nsubstitute#796.
@dtchepak
Apply review comments
72005d0 
- use string.Empty for null value from IDescribeSpecification, rather than
  falling back to ToString(). This supports the contract that
  IDescribeSpecification will be used if implemented. Replacing
  null string.Empty with matches the documented
  behaviour of IDescribeNonMatches.
- updated IDescribeSpecification code docs.
- removed GenericToNonGenericMatcherProxyWithDescribe `ToString` as it
  can use the GenericToNonGenericMatcherProxy superclass implementation.
- update ArgumentSpecification to also support IDescribeSpecification
  for its matcher.
- Replace linq with Array.ConvertAll rather than requiring an extra
  ToArray conversion.
@dtchepak
dtchepak force-pushed the improve-output-for-expected-arg-match branch from 50401f7 to 72005d0 Compare November 17, 2024 03:59
@dtchepak
dtchepak requested a review from Romfos November 17, 2024 04:00
zvirja
zvirja approved these changes Nov 18, 2024
View reviewed changes

@zvirja zvirja left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me! Small feature, but could be a good quality of life enhancement

@Romfos

Romfos commented Nov 18, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

One question why do we need ?? string.Empty? for me it looks like anti-pattern

@rbeurskens

rbeurskens commented Nov 20, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

One question why do we need ?? string.Empty? for me it looks like anti-pattern

Yes, I agree it feels like smell. IDK if it is needed, but especially since nullable reference types is enabled in the code and the specified methods are declared to return string (not string?) we could trust the implementation does not return null, or replace ?? string.Empty with ?? throw new NullReferenceException()

@dtchepak
dtchepak merged commit 116db20 into nsubstitute:main Nov 30, 2024
@dtchepak

dtchepak commented Nov 30, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

One question why do we need ?? string.Empty? for me it looks like anti-pattern

Yes, I agree it feels like smell. IDK if it is needed, but especially since nullable reference types is enabled in the code and the specified methods are declared to return string (not string?) we could trust the implementation does not return null, or replace ?? string.Empty with ?? throw new NullReferenceException()

I've merged as-is as the PR is pretty old already, but would be very happy to accept a PR to improve this code. 🙇

@dtchepak
dtchepak deleted the improve-output-for-expected-arg-match branch November 30, 2024 08:21
@rbeurskens rbeurskens mentioned this pull request Jan 18, 2025
Closed
This was referenced Jul 12, 2026
Merged
Closed
Merged
Merged
Merged
Closed
Closed
Merged
Closed
This was referenced Aug 12, 2026
Open
Closed
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Merged
Merged
Open
Open
Open
Closed
Open
Open
Open
Merged
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Closed
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@zvirja zvirja zvirja approved these changes
@alexandrnikitin alexandrnikitin Awaiting requested review from alexandrnikitin
@Romfos Romfos Awaiting requested review from Romfos
+1 more reviewer
@rbeurskens rbeurskens rbeurskens approved these changes
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Improve output for expected argument for custom argument matchers on non-match or make it customizable

4 participants

@dtchepak @Romfos @rbeurskens @zvirja