containsExactly does not honor comparator set with usingElementComparator for arrays

[fbiville]

The following test fails with AssertJ core (1.7 included).

@Test
public void should_test_contains_exactly() {
      List<String> strings = new ArrayList<String>();
      strings.add("test");
      strings.add("de taille de string");

      Comparator<String> comparator = new Comparator<String>() {
         @Override
         public int compare(String o1, String o2) {
            return (o1.length() > o2.length()) ? -1 : 1;
         }
      };
      assertThat(strings).usingElementComparator(comparator).containsExactly("de taille de string", "test");
   }
}

[joel-costigliola]

The problem comes from your comparator that does not assess equality.

comparator.compare("Biville", "Biville"); // -> return 1

containsExactly relies on comparator to assess equality.

Not a bug in my opinion, do you have another use case in mind ?

[fbiville]

Héhé, well spot :D (in my defence, I posted it for a colleague)

[Zapata]

Hello,

I have a similar issue:

public class CompareTest {

    public static class StartOfStringCompare implements Comparator<String> {
        private final int scale;

        public StartOfStringCompare(int scale) {
            this.scale = scale;
        }

        @Override
        public int compare(String o1, String o2) {
            return o1.substring(0, Math.min(o1.length() - 1, scale)).compareTo(
                    o2.substring(0, Math.min(o2.length() - 1, scale)));
        }
    }

    @Test
    public void should_test_contains_exactly() {
        assertThat(new StartOfStringCompare(3).compare("abcdef", "abcz"))
                .isEqualTo(0);

        assertThat(new String[] { "abcdef" }).usingElementComparator(
                new StartOfStringCompare(3)).containsExactly("abcz");
    }
}

I am missing something?
If a put a breakpoint into StartOfStringCompare.compare(), it's not called by containsExactly.
Version 1.7.1.

[joel-costigliola]

No that's a bug indeed, specific to containsExactly so in the meantime you can use containsOnly it's the closest assertion (it just does not check the order of elements).

Thanks for reporting this.