Fix HaveExactElements to work inside ContainElement or other collection matchers #648
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
LGTM! will merge when CI goes green |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #647
As described in #647, HaveExactElements() leaves some internal state once its Match() returns false. The state never gets cleaned afterwards and causes subsequent calls on the instance to return incorrect results. This can be a problem when the matcher is placed inside ContainElement() or any other matchers that reuse and call inner matcher instances multiple times.
This PR fixes the issue by resetting the matcher state at the beginning of the HaveExactElements#Match().