Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use Shouldly in all test projects except Polly.Specs #2458

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Jan 18, 2025

Conversation

martincostello
Copy link
Member

Migrate all test projects, except Polly.Specs, from using FluentAssertions to use Shouldly instead.

Contributes to #2450.

De-centralise the FluentAssertions references and move them to each project individually to aid removing it project-by-project to switch over to Shouldly.
Use Shouldy instead of FluentAssertions in Polly.Testing.Tests.
Use Shouldy instead of FluentAssertions in Polly.RateLimiting.Tests.
Use Shouldy instead of FluentAssertions in Polly.Extensions.Tests.
Use Shouldy instead of FluentAssertions in Polly.Core.Tests.
@martincostello martincostello added CI/build dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file .NET Pull requests that update .NET code labels Jan 18, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 18, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 85.36%. Comparing base (d19069a) to head (9b3d2d9).
Report is 9 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2458   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   85.36%   85.36%           
=======================================
  Files         312      312           
  Lines        7464     7464           
  Branches     1121     1121           
=======================================
  Hits         6372     6372           
  Misses        907      907           
  Partials      185      185           
Flag Coverage Δ
linux 85.36% <ø> (ø)
macos 85.36% <ø> (ø)
windows 85.33% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Swap for readability/correctness.
Use the `ShouldBeInOrder()` assertion method.
Use `ShouldBeEmpty()` instead of asserting a count of zero.
Fix undetected mutant by using a more strict assertion.
@martincostello martincostello marked this pull request as ready for review January 18, 2025 17:15
@martincostello martincostello merged commit 3b8ba0e into App-vNext:main Jan 18, 2025
24 checks passed
@martincostello martincostello deleted the use-shouldly branch January 18, 2025 17:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CI/build dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file .NET Pull requests that update .NET code
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant