Exception assertions and 'And'

[JesseNicholsonStorable]

I am upgrading our FA version from 5.10.3 to 6.7.0 and I am concerned that a number of our current test are using a no-longer used feature. We have many tests that look like

sut.Awaiting(x => x.Handle(command, CancellationToken.None))
    .Should()
    .ThrowAsync<RequestFailureException>()
    .And.Error.Code.Should()
    .Be(StandardErrorCodes.ResourceNotFound.Code);

Originally they were breaking on the throw, which was an easy enough fix, however now they all break on the And that follows immediately after.

I have tried searching for a topic like this but a search for why And isn't working doesn't seem to achieve much.

[dennisdoomen]

Because using Wait and Result in async code is widely discouraged, in v6 we have been very careful to remove any blocking code. You can do a couple of things to workaround this:

await sut.Awaiting(x => x.Handle(command, CancellationToken.None))
    .Should()
    .ThrowAsync<RequestFailureException>()
    .Where(e => e.Error.Code == StandardErrorCodes.ResourceNotFound.Code);

or

(await sut.Awaiting(x => x.Handle(command, CancellationToken.None))
    .Should()
    .ThrowAsync<RequestFailureException>())
    .And.Error.Code.Should()
    .Be(StandardErrorCodes.ResourceNotFound.Code);

PS: Awaiting returns a Task, so you must using await as well.

[JesseNicholsonStorable]

Thank you, that helps a lot!