more assertions on collection sizes

[jstrachan]

I figured on a ListAssert I'd be able to do things like...

assertThat(someList).size().isGreaterThan(4);

i.e. that a method size() would be available returning the IntegerAssert for further more expressive assertions on a List size.

I can submit a PR if you like?

[AlexBischof]

I like that feature but size() should be left out. It would be consistent with the other classes (e.g. ByteAssert).

[jstrachan]

Sorry I didn't grok how adding a size() method would not be consistent with ByteAssert (which is a byte, not a collection with a size value); is it the name "size" you're objecting to? Got a better idea for the name of the function?

[jstrachan]

how about assertSize()? as in:

assertThat(someList).assertSize().isGreaterThan(4);

to make it clear its different from the size() method on a List but related to it?

[jstrachan]

or hasSize()?

[joel-costigliola]

there is already an hasSize() assertion.

I must say I don't see much value in the proposal over what you can already write:

assertThat(someList.size()).isGreaterThan(4);

Do you have others use case in mind ?

[jstrachan]

How do you get the java.util.List from a ListAssert so that you can call .size() on it so that you can use it on an assertThat() call?

If there was a way to get the List value out of ListAssert, then thats an OK approach - but its not very smart-complete-in-your-IDE friendly.

I just figured, in the interest of IDE completion; having a way to navigate from ListAssert to an IntegerAssert for the size of a List seems to make the cleanest IDE-friendly DSL.

e.g. here's an example....
https://github.com/fabric8io/fabric8/blob/master/components/kubernetes-assertions/src/test/java/io/fabric8/kubernetes/assertions/Example.java#L38

through the DSL I can find a List of pods which are a ListAssert - however there's no way I can find to make an assertion on the size of that list - other than by doing a totally separate query to find the real List thats inside the ListAssert; which just seems odd. Unless I'm missing something?

[joel-costigliola]

Ok why not.
In you case I would just add more custom assertions.

[joel-costigliola]

Fixed.