Print the fully qualified class names if the simple class names are the same

[kluever]

I have 2 overloads of a method:

• setDeadline(java.time.Duration)
• setDeadline(org.joda.time.Duration)

There's a mocking failure in a test (calling the wrong overload), but the error message isn't super helpful:

1) myMethod(com.google.frobber.MyClassTest)
Argument(s) are different! Wanted:
myClass.setDeadline(
    (Duration) PT1S
);
-> at com.google.frobber.MyClassTest.myMethod(MyClassTest.java:287)
Actual invocation has different arguments:
myClass.setDeadline(
    (Duration) PT1S
);

The output attempts to include the classnames to help disambiguate, but in this case, the simple class names are identical (Duration). We should be able to detect this, and print the FQCNs if the simple names are equal.

Alternatively, we could always print the FQCNs:

mockito/src/main/java/org/mockito/internal/matchers/Equals.java

Line 55 in 6f9108b

return "(" + wanted.getClass().getSimpleName() + ") " + describe(wanted);

(We already do something similar in Truth.)

[TimvdLippe]

This is probably a relatively simple change. For anybody who is looking to contribute to Mockito, this is a good starter bug!

[saurabh7248]

I would love to try to fix this.

[TimvdLippe]

@saurabh7248 Awesome. Looking forward to the PR!

[chaehwanli]

Sorry, I got some misunderstanding. I revert my PR. :)

[TimvdLippe]

@chaehwanli Looking at https://github.com/chaehwanli/mockito/commit/2175bfb43e75d80976d75ab0338aaf751cdee9eb I think that would be the correct fix for this. Do you mind sending that as a PR?

[chaehwanli]

@TimvdLippe
Oh.. thank you for your review~ I will send again at night in KST. I'm at office. :)

[saurabh7248]

@chaehwanli's changes would have printed the full name even when the classes would have different simple names.
I have added a list of indexes in PrintSettings which would do this only for arguments having same simple names.

[TimvdLippe]

@saurabh7248 Ah good catch. Thank you so much both of you to work on this and iterating on a solution 😄 That approach SGTM. I think there are some small improvements we can make in terms of code structure, but I like that approach as well.

If you could open a PR, then we start discussing the implementation there and iterate on that separately from this issue thread. Thank you for your work thus far!

[saurabh7248]

Have opened a pull request here.

[TimvdLippe]

Fixed in 1ad8235