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

Fixed BeEquivalentTo when using a custom comparer targeting nullable types #2648

Merged

Conversation

arocheleau
Copy link
Contributor

The way the EqualityComparerEquivalencyStep<T> step is comparing the comparand's type against the equality comparer's type has been reviewed to take into account nullables.

This fixes #2595.

IMPORTANT

  • If the PR touches the public API, the changes have been approved in a separate issue with the "api-approved" label.
  • The code complies with the Coding Guidelines for C#.
  • The changes are covered by unit tests which follow the Arrange-Act-Assert syntax and the naming conventions such as is used in these tests.
  • If the PR adds a feature or fixes a bug, please update the release notes with a functional description that explains what the change means to consumers of this library, which are published on the website.
  • If the PR changes the public API the changes needs to be included by running AcceptApiChanges.ps1 or AcceptApiChanges.sh.
  • If the PR affects the documentation, please include your changes in this pull request so the documentation will appear on the website.
    • Please also run ./build.sh --target spellcheck or .\build.ps1 --target spellcheck before pushing and check the good outcome

Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 16, 2024

Qodana for .NET

It seems all right 👌

No new problems were found according to the checks applied

💡 Qodana analysis was run in the pull request mode: only the changed files were checked
☁️ View the detailed Qodana report

Contact Qodana team

Contact us at qodana-support@jetbrains.com

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented May 16, 2024

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 9224869081

Details

  • 2 of 2 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 1 file are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage remained the same at 97.566%

Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 9161168279: 0.0%
Covered Lines: 12055
Relevant Lines: 12239

💛 - Coveralls

@arocheleau arocheleau marked this pull request as ready for review May 16, 2024 19:57
Copy link
Member

@dennisdoomen dennisdoomen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks. In addition to the comments from @IT-VBFK, I have nothing more to add than a suggestion

docs/_pages/releases.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@dennisdoomen dennisdoomen requested a review from jnyrup May 19, 2024 08:57
@arocheleau arocheleau force-pushed the bug/2595/nullable-field-comparer branch from e3aa155 to 21ecef5 Compare May 21, 2024 20:15
@arocheleau arocheleau force-pushed the bug/2595/nullable-field-comparer branch from 21ecef5 to 5dddcda Compare May 23, 2024 18:30
@jnyrup jnyrup merged commit fa3b9cb into fluentassertions:develop May 27, 2024
7 checks passed
@arocheleau arocheleau deleted the bug/2595/nullable-field-comparer branch May 27, 2024 19:23
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Null reference exception when using custom comparer in equivalency options
5 participants