Branch: master
Find file Copy path
Fetching contributors…
Cannot retrieve contributors at this time
1265 lines (1031 sloc) 66 KB

Download Slack EUPL Build Status Coverage security status stability status


Atrium is an open-source assertion library for Kotlin with a fluent API. The project was inspired by AssertJ at first (and was named AssertK) but it moved on and provides now more flexibility, features and hints to its users (so to you 😉).

⚠️ You are taking a sneak peek at the next version. Please have a look at the README of the git tag in case you are looking for the documentation of the corresponding version. For instance, the REAMDE of v0.7.0.

Atrium is designed to support different APIs, different reporting styles and Internationalization (i18n). The core of Atrium as well as the builders to create sophisticated assertions are designed to be extensible and thus allow you to extend or replace components easily.

Atrium currently provides two API styles: pure fluent and infix where both of them have their design focus on usability in conjunction with code completion functionality provided by your IDE. See Examples below to get a feel for how you could benefit from Atrium.

Table of Content


1. Set Up Dependency

Atrium is linked to jcenter but can also be retrieved directly from bintray.


buildscript {
    ext { atrium_version='0.7.0' }
repositories {
    // either use jcenter or the repository on the next line
    // maven { url "" }
dependencies {
    testCompile "ch.tutteli.atrium:atrium-cc-en_GB-robstoll:$atrium_version"

We have defined a dependency to the bundle atrium-cc-en_GB-robstoll in the above example which provides a pure fluent API.

click to see how the setup for the infix api looks like
buildscript {
    ext { atrium_version='0.7.0' }
repositories {
    // either use jcenter or the repository on the next line
    // maven { url "" }
dependencies {
    testCompile("ch.tutteli.atrium:atrium-cc-infix-en_GB-robstoll:$atrium_version") { 
        exclude group: 'ch.tutteli.atrium', module: 'atrium-api-cc-en_GB-jvm' 

We have to define an exclude due to a missing feature (or you could call it a bug) so that maven dependencies defined with <scope>runtime</scope> are treated as compile nonetheless. If you are using gradle > 4.6, then you can put enableFeaturePreview("IMPROVED_POM_SUPPORT") in your settings.gradle and simplify the dependencies section to the following:

dependencies {
    testCompile "ch.tutteli.atrium:atrium-cc-infix-en_GB-robstoll:$atrium_version" 

click to see how the setup for the fluent API in German looks like
buildscript {
    ext { atrium_version='0.7.0' }
repositories {
    // either use jcenter or the repository on the next line
    // maven { url "" }
dependencies {
    testCompile("ch.tutteli.atrium:atrium-cc-de_CH-robstoll:$atrium_version") { 
        exclude group: 'ch.tutteli.atrium', module: 'atrium-api-cc-en_GB-jvm' 

We have to define an exclude due to a missing feature (or you could call it a bug) so that maven dependencies defined with <scope>runtime</scope> are treated as compile nonetheless. If you are using gradle > 4.6, then you can put enableFeaturePreview("IMPROVED_POM_SUPPORT") in your settings.gradle and simplify the dependencies section to the following:

dependencies {
    testCompile "ch.tutteli.atrium:atrium-cc-de_CH-robstoll:$atrium_version" 

Because maven is a bit more verbose than gradle, the example is not listed here but a settings.xml is provided to set up the repository as well as an example pom.xml which includes the necessary dependencies.

That is all, you are all set. The next section shows how to use Atrium.


We are using the API provided by the bundle module atrium-cc-en_GB-robstoll in the following examples. It provides a pure fluent API. Have a look at apis/ to see how the infix API looks like, how they differ respectively.

Your First Assertion

We start off with a simple example:

import ch.tutteli.atrium.verbs.assert
val x = 10

The statement can be read as "I assert, x to be nine" where an equality check is used (for an identity check, you have to use isSameAs). Since this is false an AssertionError is thrown with the following message:

assert: 10        (java.lang.Integer <934275857>)
◆ to be: 9        (java.lang.Integer <1364913072>)

where ◆ ... represents a single assertion for the subject (10 in the above example) of the assertion. The examples in the following sections include the error message (the output) in the code example itself as comments.

We have used the predefined assertion verb assert in the above example which we had to import first. We will omit the import statement in the remaining examples for brevity.

You want to run the example yourself? Have a look at the Installation section which explains how to set up a dependency to Atrium.

ℹ️ <- this icon signifies additional information, worth reading IMO but if you are only after code examples, then you can skip now to the next section (otherwise click on the arrow to expand the section)

ℹ️ further assertion verbs...

Atrium provides two further assertion verbs out of the box: assertThat and expect which you can import with import ch.tutteli.atrium.verbs.assertThat, import ch.tutteli.atrium.verbs.expect respectively. Yet, you can also define your own assertion verbs if another is your favourite.

The next section shows how you can define multiple assertions for the same subject.

Define Single Assertions or Assertion Groups

 // two single assertions
assert(4 + 6).isLessThan(5).isGreaterThan(10)
    // assert: 10        (java.lang.Integer <1841396611>)
    // ◆ is less than: 5        (java.lang.Integer <1577592551>)

Using the fluent API allows you to write the assert(...) part only once but making several single assertions for the same subject. The expression which determines the subject of the assertion (4 + 6 in the above example) is evaluated only once.

In this sense we could have written it also as follows (which is only the same because 4 + 6 does not have side effects).

assert(4 + 6).isLessThan(5)
assert(4 + 6).isGreaterThan(10)

Correspondingly, the first assert statement (which does not hold) throws an AssertionError. In the above example, isLessThan(5) is already wrong and thus isGreaterThan(10) was not evaluated at all.

If you want that both assertions are evaluated together, then use the assertion group syntax as follows:

// assertion group

assert(4 + 6) {
    // assert: 10        (java.lang.Integer <1841396611>)
    // ◆ is less than: 5        (java.lang.Integer <1577592551>)
    // ◆ is greater than: 10        (java.lang.Integer <1841396611>)

An assertion group throws an AssertionError at the end of its block; hence reports that both assertions do not hold.

You can use and as filling element between single assertions and assertion group blocks:

assert(4 + 6).isLessThan(5).and.isGreaterThan(10)

assert(4 + 6) { 
    // ... 
} and { 
    // ...
ℹ️ assertion group block techniqually speaking...

An assertion group block is actually nothing else than a lambda with a receiver of type Assert (code-ish speaking Assert<T>.() -> Unit). The only thing you need to know about Assert at the moment is, that assert(4 + 6) creates an Assert<Int> and that all assertion functions are defined as extension function of Assert. Have a look at writing an own assertion function to get more information about Assert.

Nullable Types

val subtitle : String? = "postulating assertions made easy"
    // assert: "postulating assertions made easy"        <22600334>
    // ◆ to be: null

assert(subtitle).notToBeNull { startsWith("atrium") }
    //assert: "postulating assertions made easy"        <651100072>
    //◆ starts with: "atrium"        <222427158>

If the subject of the assertion has a nullable type then you need to define first, whether you expect it to be null or not. In case you expect it notToBeNull you can define one or more subsequent assertions for the subject as if it had a non-nullable type (String in the above example) by defining an assertion group block -- { startsWith("atrium") } in the above example.

ℹ️ dealing a lot with nullable types...

There is a shortcut function notToBeNullBut(x) in case you have to deal a lot with nullable types. It is short for notToBeNull { toBe(x) }. You might want to have a look at the Java Interoperability section if you have to deal with nullable types due to Java code.

Expect an Exception

assert {
    //this block does something but eventually...
    throw IllegalArgumentException("name is empty")

    // assert the thrown exception: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: name is empty        (java.lang.IllegalArgumentException <1364913072>)
    // ◆ is a: IllegalStateException (java.lang.IllegalStateException)

You can define an assert block together with the function toThrow to make the assertion that the block throws a certain exception (IllegalStateException in the example above).

Moreover, you can define one or more subsequent assertions in the same assertion statement with the help of an assertion group block. The subsequent assertions are evaluated in case the expected Throwable is thrown and is of the same type as the expected one (or a subtype). For instance:

assert {
    throw IllegalArgumentException("name is empty")
}.toThrow<IllegalArgumentException> {
    message { startsWith("firstName") }
    // assert the thrown exception: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: name is empty        (java.lang.IllegalArgumentException <371800738>)
    // ◆ ▶ message: "name is empty"        <1364767791>
    //     ◾ starts with: "firstName"        <1499136125>

Notice message in the assertion group block is a shortcut for property(subject::message).notToBeNull { ... }, which creates a property assertion (see next section) about Throwable::message.

Property Assertions

data class Person(val name: String, val isStudent: Boolean)
val myPerson = Person("Robert", false) 

assert(myPerson) {
    // assert: Person(name=Robert, isStudent=false)        (Person <1841396611>)
    // ◆ ▶ name: "Robert"        <1577592551>
    //     ◾ to be: "Peter"        <854587510>
    // ◆ ▶ isStudent: false
    //     ◾ to be: true    

You can also make assertions about one or several properties of the subject using property in an assertion group block -- general speaking, it allows you to create feature assertions without the need of own assertion functions.

subject within an assertion group block refers to the subject of the assertion (myPerson in the above example). As a reminder, an assertion group block is a lambda with receiver where the receiver is the Assert created by assert(...) (see assertion group block for further details). You probably have already guessed it, subject is actually a property of Assert.

Back to property assertions. In the above example we created two feature assertions: one for the property name and the other for the property isStudent of myPerson. A feature assertion is indicated as follows in the output. It starts with a followed by the feature's name and its actual value. So the above output can be read as "I assert, Person's name (which is actually "Robert") to be "Peter" and its property isStudent (which is actually false) to be true".

⁉️ <- this icon signifies answers/input for advanced users, you might want to skip them if you are new to Atrium.

⁉️ Wrap each property into an assertion function? You might be asking yourself why I bothered providing the assertion function `message` shown in the example [Expect an Exception](#expect-an-exception) and whether it is better to [write an own assertion function](#write-own-assertion-functions) or use `property`:

The only drawback IMO of using an existing property is that a few more key strokes are required compared to writing an own assertion function once and then reuse it (as I did with message). Yet, I do not recommend to write an own assertion function for every single property, because one quickly forgets to rename the assertion function if the property as such is renamed (e.g., as part of an IDE refactoring). As you can see, you would need to keep the property and the assertion function in sync to be meaningful (otherwise you either quickly confuse things or you have multiple names for the same thing).

Hence, only write an own assertion function in case you use it a lot and you need to apply other transformations first. For instance, if you need to apply noToBeNull first -- which is the case when the property has a nullable type (as for Throwable::message, see Nullable Types for further information). In such a case I would find it too cumbersome to write property(subject::xY).notToBeNull { ... } all the time and would prefer xY { ... } and make some extra effort when the property is renamed.

Method Assertions

data class Person(val firstName: String, val lastName: String) {
    fun fullName() = "$firstName $lastName"
    fun nickname(includeLastName: Boolean) = when(includeLastName){
        false -> "Mr. $firstName"
        true -> "$firstName aka. $lastName"
val person = Person("Robert", "Stoll")

assert(person) {
    returnValueOf(subject::fullName).contains("treboR", "llotS")
    returnValueOf(subject::nickname, false).toBe("Robert aka. Stoll")
    // assert: Person(firstName=Robert, lastName=Stoll)        ($1$2$Person <168907708>)
    // ◆ ▶ fullName(): "Robert Stoll"        <447718425>
    //     ◾ contains: "treboR"        <1206569586>
    //       ⚬ ▶ number of occurrences: 0
    //           ◾ is at least: 1
    //     ◾ contains: "llotS"        <1427381743>
    //       ⚬ ▶ number of occurrences: 0
    //           ◾ is at least: 1
    // ◆ ▶ nickname(false): "Mr. Robert"        <1427646530>
    //     ◾ to be: "Robert aka. Stoll"        <846254484>

You can also make an assertion about a method of the subject or rather about the value which is returned when calling the method with some specified arguments. Such feature assertions can be made with the help of the assertion function returnValueOf. There are overloads to support methods with up to 5 parameters (notice, fullName has none and nickname has one parameter in the above example).

The error message shows also another nice feature of Atrium. It provides builders to create more sophisticated assertions. Using contains("treboR", "llotS") is actually a shortcut for calling a sophisticated assertion builder for CharSequence. In this example it calls contains.atLeast(1).values("treboR", "llotS") which is reflected in the output. Have a look at API differences, CharSequence contains to see more options.

💩 <- this icon signifies a bug in Kotlin which you might encounter as well. We try to provide you workaround

💩 using `returnValueOf` results in an overload ambigouity

Unfortunately, due to a bug in Kotlin (please upvote it) you wont be able to use returnValueOf for a method which has overloads in certain situations. As workaround you can use the domain function returnValueOfX where X needs to be replaced by the number of arguments expected. Hopefully you never encounter the bug but in case... following an example:

assert(person) {
    AssertImpl.feature.returnValueOf1(this, Person::nickname, arg1= false).toBe("Robert aka. Stoll")

The output is the same as above.

In other cases type inference will not be good enough to infer T of Assert<T>.() -> Unit if you use the workaround (this bug). you can use the helper function subAssert in such cases which is merely an identity function. As an example, have a look at FeatureAssertionsClassReferenceSpec

⁉️ Why only overloads for up to 5 parameters

You might be asking yourself why I stopped at 5 Parameters. You could go on and create further overloads for 6 and more parameters, but... uh... can you smell it 😜. In case you have a function with 6 or more parameters and you do not want or cannot to get rid of it, then I suggest that you write a specific assertion function for it.

Type Assertions

interface SuperType
data class SubType1(val number: Int): SuperType
data class SubType2(val word: String): SuperType

val x: SuperType = SubType2("hello")
assert(x).isA<SubType1> {
    // assert: SubType2(s=hello)        ( <2134607032>)
    // ◆ is type or sub-type of: SubType1 (
    //    ❗❗ Could not evaluate the defined assertion(s) -- the down-cast to failed.

You can narrow a type with the isA function. On one hand it checks that the subject of the current assertion is actually the expected type and on the other hand it turns the subject into the type which allows you to make specific assertions only possible for the corresponding type -- for instance, considering the above example, number is not available on SuperType but only on SubType2.

⁉️ How to make arbitrary type transformations?

Atrium provides the possibility to make arbitrary type transformations as long as you can provide a checking function which can tell whether the transformation is safe or not and a transformation function which performs the transformation as such. For an example, have a look at the TypeTransformationAssertionCreatorSpec.

Collection Assertions

Atrium provides assertion builders which allow to make sophisticated contains assertions for Iterable<T>. Such a building process allows you to define very specific assertions, where the process is guided by a fluent builder pattern. You can either use such an Assertion Builder to create a specific assertion or one of the Shortcut Functions in case you have kind of a common case. The following sub sections show both use cases by examples.

Shortcut Functions

assert(listOf(1, 2, 2, 4)).contains(2, 3)        

    // assert: [1, 2, 2, 4]        (java.util.Arrays$ArrayList <1448525331>) 
    // ◆ contains, in any order: 3        (java.lang.Integer <1108924067>)
    //   ⚬ ▶ number of occurrences: 0
    //       ◾ is at least: 1

The assertion function contains(2, 3) is a shortcut for using a Sophisticated Assertion Builder -- it actually calls contains.inAnyOrder.atLeast(1).values(2, 3). This is reflected in the output, which tells us that we expected that the number of occurrences of 3 (which is actually 0) is at least: 1.

ℹ️ and what about expected value 2?Exactly, what about the expected value 2, why do we not see anything about it in the output? The output does not show anything about the expected value 2 because the predefined assertion verbs have configured ReporterBuilder to use an Only Failure Reporter which shows us only assertions (or sub assertions) which failed.

Back to the shortcut functions.

Next to expecting that certain values are contained in or rather returned by an Iterable, Atrium allows us to write identification lambdas in form of assertion group blocks (they can also be thought of as matchers / predicates, I prefer the term identification lambdas when we talk about contains). An entry is considered as identified, if it holds all specified assertions of such a block. Following an example:

assert(listOf(1, 2, 2, 4)).contains({ isLessThan(0) }, { isGreaterThan(2); isLessThan(4) })

    // assert: [1, 2, 2, 4]        (java.util.Arrays$ArrayList <1144068272>) 
    // ◆ contains, in any order:   
    //   ⚬ an entry which:   
    //       » is less than: 0        (java.lang.Integer <1985836631>) 
    //     ⚬ ▶ number of occurrences: 0 
    //         ◾ is at least: 1 
    //   ⚬ an entry which:    
    //       » is greater than: 2        (java.lang.Integer <1948471365>)
    //       » is less than: 4        (java.lang.Integer <1636506029>) 
    //     ⚬ ▶ number of occurrences: 0
    //         ◾ is at least: 1

In the above example neither of the two identification lambdas matched any entries and thus both are reported as failing (sub) assertions.

Two other contains shortcut functions which Atrium provides for Iterable<T> are kind of the opposite of inAnyOrder.atLeast(1) and are named containsStrictly. Again, Atrium provides two overloads, one for values, e.g. containsStrictly(1, 2) which calls contains.inOrder.only.values(1, 2) and a second one which expects one or more identification lambdas, e.g. containsStriclty({ isLessThan(0) }, { isGreaterThan(5) }) and effectively calls contains.inOrder.only.entries({ isLessThan(2) }, { isGreaterThan(5) }). We will spare the examples here and show them in the following sections.

Atrium provides also a containsNot shortcut function. Furthermore, it provides aliases for contains and containsNot named any and none, which might be a better choice if you think in terms of asserting a predicate holds. These two are completed with an all assertion function:

assert(listOf(1, 2, 3, 4)).any { isLessThan(0) }
assert(listOf(1, 2, 3, 4)).none { isGreaterThan(2) }
assert(listOf(1, 2, 3, 4)).all { isGreatherThan(2) }

Sophisticated Assertion Builders

Sophisticated assertion builders implement a fluent builder pattern. To use the assertion builder for sophisticated Iterable<T>-contains-assertions, you can type contains -- as you would when using the Shortcut Functions contains -- but type . as next step (so that are using the property contains instead of one of the shortcut functions). Currently, the builder provides two options, either inAnyOrder or inOrder. In case you are using an IDE, you do not really have to think too much -- use code completion; the fluent builders will guide you through your decision making ☺️

Following on the last section we will start with an inOrder example:

assert(listOf(1, 2, 2, 4)).contains.inOrder.only.entries({ isLessThan(3) }, { isLessThan(2) })
    // assert: [1, 2, 2, 4]        (java.util.Arrays$ArrayList <817978763>)
    // ◆ contains only, in order:     
    //   ✔ ▶ entry 0: 1        (java.lang.Integer <1578009262>)
    //       ◾ an entry which:    
    //         ⚬ is less than: 3        (java.lang.Integer <1108924067>)
    //   ✘ ▶ entry 1: 2        (java.lang.Integer <1948471365>)
    //       ◾ an entry which:    
    //         ⚬ is less than: 2        (java.lang.Integer <1948471365>)
    //   ✘ ▶ size: 4
    //       ◾ to be: 2
    //         ❗❗ additional entries detected:    
    //            ⚬ entry 2: 2        (java.lang.Integer <1948471365>)
    //            ⚬ entry 3: 4        (java.lang.Integer <1636506029>) 

Since we have chosen the only option, Atrium shows us a summary where we see three things:

  • Whether a specified identification lambda matched (signified by or ) the corresponding entry or not (e.g. ✘ ▶ entry 1: was 2 and we expected, it is less than 2)
  • Whether the expected size was correct or not (✘ ▶ size: was 4, we expected it, to be: 2 -- see also Property Assertions)
  • and last but not least, mismatches or additional entries as further clue (❗❗ additional entries detected).

😍 I am pretty sure you are going to love this feature as well. Please star Atrium if you like using it.

⁉️ too verbose?

As side notice, in case you are dealing with large Iterable and do not want such a verbose output, then let me know it by writing a feature request. So far the verbose output was always handy for me but you might have other test cases than me. Also notice, that Atrium cannot yet deal with infinite Iterables. If you have to, then please open a feature request as well.

Following one more example for inOrder as well as a few examples for inAnyOrder. I think explanations are no longer required at this stage. In case you have a question (no matter about which section), then please turn up in the atrium Slack channel (Invite yourself in case you do not have an account yet) and I happily answer your question there.

assert(listOf(1, 2, 2, 4)).contains.inOrder.only.values(1, 2, 2, 3, 4)

    // assert: [1, 2, 2, 4]        (java.util.Arrays$ArrayList <1362728240>)
    // ◆ contains only, in order:   
    //   ✔ ▶ entry 0: 1        (java.lang.Integer <1578009262>)
    //       ◾ to be: 1        (java.lang.Integer <1578009262>)
    //   ✔ ▶ entry 1: 2        (java.lang.Integer <1948471365>)
    //       ◾ to be: 2        (java.lang.Integer <1948471365>)
    //   ✔ ▶ entry 2: 2        (java.lang.Integer <1948471365>)
    //       ◾ to be: 2        (java.lang.Integer <1948471365>)
    //   ✘ ▶ entry 3: 4        (java.lang.Integer <1636506029>)
    //       ◾ to be: 3        (java.lang.Integer <1108924067>)
    //   ✘ ▶ entry 4: ❗❗ hasNext() returned false
    //       ◾ to be: 4        (java.lang.Integer <1636506029>)
    //   ✘ ▶ size: 4
    //       ◾ to be: 5

assert(listOf(1, 2, 2, 4)).contains.inAnyOrder.atLeast(1).butAtMost(2).entries({ isLessThan(3) })

    // assert: [1, 2, 2, 4]        (java.util.Arrays$ArrayList <1092572064>)
    // ◆ contains, in any order:   
    //   ⚬ an entry which:   
    //       » is less than: 3        (java.lang.Integer <1108924067>)
    //     ⚬ ▶ number of occurrences: 3
    //         ◾ is at most: 2

assert(listOf(1, 2, 2, 4)).contains.inAnyOrder.only.values(1, 2, 3, 4)
    // assert: [1, 2, 2, 4]        (java.util.Arrays$ArrayList <922511709>)
    // ◆ contains only, in any order:    
    //   ✔ an entry which is: 1        (java.lang.Integer <1578009262>) 
    //   ✔ an entry which is: 2        (java.lang.Integer <1948471365>) 
    //   ✘ an entry which is: 3        (java.lang.Integer <1108924067>)  
    //   ✔ an entry which is: 4        (java.lang.Integer <1636506029>) 
    //   ✔ ▶ size: 4  
    //       ◾ to be: 4
    //   ❗❗ following entries were mismatched:    
    //      ⚬ 2        (java.lang.Integer <1948471365>)
assert(listOf(1, 2, 2, 4)).contains.inAnyOrder.only.values(4, 3, 2, 2, 1)

    // assert: [1, 2, 2, 4]        (java.util.Arrays$ArrayList <331994761>)
    // ◆ contains only, in any order:   
    //   ✔ an entry which is: 4        (java.lang.Integer <1636506029>)
    //   ✘ an entry which is: 3        (java.lang.Integer <1108924067>)
    //   ✔ an entry which is: 2        (java.lang.Integer <1948471365>)
    //   ✔ an entry which is: 2        (java.lang.Integer <1948471365>)
    //   ✔ an entry which is: 1        (java.lang.Integer <1578009262>)
    //   ✘ ▶ size: 4
    //       ◾ to be: 5

Further Examples

Atrium supports further assertion builders (e.g, for CharSequence) as well as assertion functions which have not been shown in the examples. Have a look at apis/ for a few more examples. This site contains also a list of all APIs with links to their assertion function catalogs.

You can also have a look at the specifications for more examples.

How is Atrium different from other Assertion Libraries

The following subsections shall give you a quick overview how Atrium differ from other assertion libraries.

Ready to Help

Atrium is designed to help you whenever possible. I think this is the biggest difference to other assertion libraries and a very handy one indeed.

1. Fluent API with Code Documentation

Atrium provides a fluent API where the design focus was put on the interoperability (of the API) with the code completion functionality of your IDE. Or in other words, you can always use code completion to get direct help from your IDE. This experience is improved by providing up-to-date code documentation (in form of KDoc) for all assertion functions, so that you get the extra help needed.

💩 There is no KDoc for toBe

There is, but IntelliJ will not show it to you due to this bug (please upvote it). You should be able to see the KDoc of other functions without problems. But in case, you can also browse the online documentation, e.g. KDoc of toBe.

2. Additional Information in Failure Reporting

Atrium adds extra information to error messages so that you get quickly a better idea of what went wrong. For instance, for the following assertion (which fails)

assert(listOf(1, 2, 3)).contains.inOrder.only.values(1, 3)

Atrium points out which values were found, makes an implicit assertion about the size and also states which entries were additionally contained in the list:

assert: [1, 2, 3]        (java.util.Arrays$ArrayList <1287934450>)
◆ contains only, in order: 
  ✔ ▶ entry 0: 1        (java.lang.Integer <6519275>)
      ◾ to be: 1        (java.lang.Integer <6519275>)
  ✘ ▶ entry 1: 2        (java.lang.Integer <692331943>)
      ◾ to be: 3        (java.lang.Integer <692331943>)
  ✘ ▶ size: 3
      ◾ to be: 2
        ❗❗ additional entries detected: 
           ⚬ entry 2: 3        (java.lang.Integer <1741979653>)

Let us have a look at another example.

assert(9.99f).toBeWithErrorTolerance(10.0f, 0.01f)

The above assertion looks good at first sight but actually fails (at least on my machine). And without some extra information in the output we would believe that there is actually a bug in the assertion library itself. But Atrium shows where it goes wrong and even gives a possible hint:

assert: 9.99        (java.lang.Float <1287934450>)
◆ to be (error ± 0.01): 10.0        (java.lang.Float <6519275>)
    » failure might be due to using java.lang.Float, see exact check on the next line
    » exact check is |9.989999771118164 - 10.0| = 0.010000228881835938 ≤ 0.009999999776482582

One last example. This time about making an assertion that a certain Throwable is thrown but the assertion fails because it was the wrong one. Atrium comes with a very useful hint, it shows the actual exception. For instance, for:

assert {
  try {
      throw UnsupportedOperationException("not supported")
  } catch(t: Throwable) {
      throw IllegalArgumentException("no no no...", t)
}.toThrow<IllegalStateException> { messageContains("no no no") }

the error reporting look as follows:

expect the thrown exception: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException
◆ is a: IllegalStateException (java.lang.IllegalStateException)
  » Properties of the unexpected IllegalArgumentException
    » message: "no no no..."        <834133664>
    » stacktrace: 
      ⚬ TestKt$main$1.invoke(test.kt:12)
      ⚬ TestKt$main$1.invoke(test.kt)
      ⚬ TestKt.main(test.kt:72)
    » cause: java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException
        » message: "not supported"        <985934102>
        » stacktrace: 
          ⚬ TestKt$main$1.invoke(test.kt:10)

3. Prevents you from Pitfalls

But not enough. There are certain pitfalls when it comes to using an assertion library and Atrium tries to prevent you from those.

For instance, an overload of toBe and of notToBe for BigDecimal was introduced which are both deprecated and throw a PleaseReplaceException. The reason behind it? It is very likely that a user actually wants to compare that a certain BigDecimal is numerically (not) equal to another BigDecimal rather than including BigDecimal.scale in the comparison. Accordingly, the deprecation message of toBe (notToBe alike) explains the problem and suggests to either use isNumericallyEqualTo or isEqualIncludingScale. And if the user should decide to use isEqualIncludingScale and at some point an assertion fails only due to the comparison of BigDecimal.scale then Atrium reminds us of the possible pitfall. For instance:

assert: 10        (java.math.BigDecimal <1287934450>)
◆ is equal (including scale): 10.0        (java.math.BigDecimal <6519275>)
    » notice, if you used isNumericallyEqualTo then the assertion would have hold.


Another design goal of Atrium was to give you the flexibility needed but still adhere to a concise design. First and most importantly, Atrium does not enforce a certain style on your code base. Quite the contrary, it gives you the flexibility to choose a desired name for the assertion verbs, it continues by providing the possibility to configure the reporting style, goes on that you can chose from different API styles and ends that you can replace almost all components by other implementations and hook into existing.

So for instance, if you like to use an infix API, then use the bundle atrium-cc-infix-en_UK-robstoll. You prefer pure fluent and do not even want to see infix style in your code, then use atrium-cc-en_GB-robstoll which provides a pure fluent style API.

You are free to choose what fits best without introducing ambiguity etc. You could even mix up different APIs if needed (but not without losing conciseness I guess -- but hey, it is your decision 😉).


The last difference is not yet fully-blown implemented but the design of Atrium has everything needed to go down the planed Roadmap. Might well be that this topic is not really a concern of yours; unless...

  • you are using domain-driven-design and would like to adopt the ubiquitous language also to your test code.
  • you want to document the results of your defined assertions (in different languages)

Atrium already supports APIs in two languages, and it is an easy task to translate an API to another language (hello DDD-people 👋 you are good to go). Moreover, it is already possible to generate the output in a different language than the used API (e.g. code in English but report in German).

Together with the HTML-Report feature (currently missing but will follow) you will be able to generate reports in different languages. Already the HTML-Report feature as such might be of your interest. You can use it to document your user stories etc (almost) for free. In case you have clients who speak different languages then the HTML-Report together with the i18n feature will be especially helpful. I should not go on here, the HTML-Report feature is not yet implemented, but you can see what kind of road I plan to go down to.

Write own Assertion Functions

Are you missing an assertion function for a specific type and the generic functions property and returnValueOf are not good enough?

Writing one is very simple and a pull request of your new assertion function is very much appreciated. Following an example:

fun Assert<Int>.isMultipleOf(base: Int) = createAndAddAssertion(
    Untranslatable("is multiple of"), base, { subject % base == 0 })

and its usage:

    // assert: 12        (java.lang.Integer <934275857>)
    // ◆ is multiple of: 5        (java.lang.Integer <1364913072>)

Let us see how we actually defined isMultipleOf.

  1. Choose the extension point: in our example we want to provide the assertion function for Ints. Hence we define isMultipleOf as extension function of Assert<Int>.

  2. Use the method createAndAddAssertion (which is provided by AssertionPlant) to create the assertion and add it to the plant itself. The method returns the AssertionPlant making it easy for you to provide a fluent API as well.

    ℹ️ Wait what is an AssertionPlant?

    Assert is a typealias for AssertionPlant<T>. We get an AssertionPlant<Int> when we call assert(12) and an AssertionPlant<String> for assert("hello"). In our case we want to define the assertion function only for subjects of type Int and thus used Assert<Int>. You could have written the extension for AssertionPlant<Int> which is exactly the same. Whether you prefer Assert or AssertionPlant is up to you, though we recommend to use Assert for API functions and AssertionPlant in other context (such as in domain functions, see API in a different Language for instance).

    The method createAndAddAssertion expects:

    • a Translatable as description of your assertion.
    • the representation of the expected value.
    • and the actual check as lambda where you typically use the subject of the assertion.

We used an Untranslatable in the above example as first argument because we are not bothered with internationalization at this point (have a look at Internationalization).

Typically you use the expected value itself as its representation -- so you pass it as second argument. And finally you specify the test as such in the lambda passed as third argument.

⁉️ do not access subject expect in the third argument.

if you do not access subject other than in the lambda passed as third argument, then you have what I call a subjectless reporting function. This is a good property because it means your function can be used in explanation groups without breaking reporting. For instance, assert(listOf(1, 2, 5, 8,9)).all { isMultipleOf(2) } would blow up in the middle of error reporting if we did not adhere to the subjectless reporting property.

It is recommended to verify your assertion functions against two abstract specs which are contained in atrium-spec. I will provide more information if someone is interested.

But not all assertion functions require a value which is somehow compared against the subject -- some make an assertion about a property of the subject without comparing it against an expected value. Consider the following assertion function:

fun Assert<Int>.isEven() = createAndAddAssertion(
    DescriptionBasic.IS, RawString.create("an even number"), { subject % 2 == 0 })

We are using a RawString here so that "an even number" is not treated as a String in reporting. Also notice, that we are reusing a common description (DescriptionBasic.IS) as first argument. Its usage looks then as follows:

    // assert: 13        (java.lang.Integer <1841396611>)
    // ◆ is: an even number
⁉️ provide some extra hints

Do you want to provide extra hints in case the assertion fails? Have a look at AssertImpl.builder.descriptive.withTest({...}).withFailureHint. You might want to have a look at AssertImpl in general, it is kind of the entry point for assertion-function-writers. It guides you to existing assertion function implementations as well as to the AssertionBuilder which itself helps you with creating assertions.

⁉️ create a sophisticated assertion builder

Do you want to write an own sophisticated assertion builder (or extend a current with more options) instead of an assertion function? Great, I do not provide hands on documentation yet (had only one question about it so far). Therefore, please have a look at the implementation, for instance how the sophisticated assertion builders for Iterable<T> are defined: ch.tutteli.atrium.creating.iterable.contains. Notice that the implementation supports Internationalization.

I am willing to provide more documentation if you need it (please open an issue). In the meantime I might help you via slack, please post your questions in the atrium Slack channel (Invite yourself in case you do not have an account yet).

Use own Assertion Verbs

Atrium offers three assertion verbs out of the box: assert, assertThat and expect.

But you can also define your own set of assertion verbs if they do not suite you or if you do not want that all of them are available in your classpath. In order to create an own assertion verb it is sufficient to:

  1. Copy the file content of atriumVerbs.kt
  2. Create your own atriumVerbs.kt and paste the previously copied content.
  3. Adjust package name and imports and rename assert and expect as desired (you can also leave it that way of course).
  4. Most probably you can remove AssertionVerbFactory at the bottom of the file
  5. exclude atrium-verbs-jvm (atrium-verbs-js respectively) from your dependencies. Taking the setup shown in the Installation section, you would replace the dependencies block as follows:
    dependencies {
        testCompile("ch.tutteli.atrium:atrium-cc-en_GB-robstoll:$atrium_version") {
            exclude group: 'ch.tutteli.atrium', module: 'atrium-verbs-jvm'

As you can see, it is up to you if you use the same name for all assertion functions or not (Atrium itself uses expect to postulate assertions about thrown Throwables and assert for other assertions).

What are the benefits of creating an own assertion verb:

  • you can limit the set of available assertion verbs.
    Say you want that everyone uses expect but not assertThat, removing assertThat is surely a better option than using a linter.

  • you can encapsulate the reporting style.
    This is especially useful if you have multiple projects and want to have a consistent reporting style.
    For instance, you could change from same-line to multi-line reporting or report not only failing but also successful assertions, change the output language etc.

    ⁉️ where should I put the atriumVerbs.kt?

    I suggest you create an adapter project for Atrium where you specify the assertion verbs. And most likely you will accumulate them with assertion functions which are so common that they appear in multiple projects (please share them with us if they are not of an internal nature 😉)

What are the drawbacks:

  • you have to maintain your assertion verbs. That should not be a big deal -- you might have to fix breaking changes (e.g. rename a method) when you update Atrium.


The ReporterBuilder lets you choose among different options to configure the style of the reporting. For instance, in case you are not happy with the predefined bullet points, then you can change them via the ReporterBuilder. Have a look at atriumVerbs.kt of atrium-api-cc-de_CH where you can find an example.

Or if you prefer multi-line reporting over single-line reporting, then you can configure ReporterBuilder as follows. Instead of using .withTextSameLineAssertionPairFormatter() you use the following:

.withTextAssertionPairFormatter { objectFormatter, translator ->
    TextNextLineAssertionPairFormatter(objectFormatter, translator)

The output for:


Would then look as follows:

  10        (java.lang.Integer <934275857>)
◆ to be: 
  9        (java.lang.Integer <1364913072>)

instead of:

assert: 10        (java.lang.Integer <934275857>)
◆ to be: 9        (java.lang.Integer <1364913072>)

You prefer another reporting style but Atrium does not yet support it? Please let me know it by writing a feature request.

There are more options to choose from. It does not matter if you use your own assertion verb or a predefined one. You can provide your custom configured Reporter by providing a ReporterFactory (via ServiceLoader-mechanism). An example is given in atriumVerbs.kt of atrium-api-cc-de_CH.


We distinguish between two use cases. You might want to generate the Report in a different language or/and you might want to use the API in a different language.


Following on the example in Write own Assertion Functions we show here how you write the function, so that it supports i18n. This way the report could be generated in another language.

The difference lies in the first argument passed to createAndAddAssertion; we do no longer use an Untranslatable but a proper Translatable.

fun Assert<Int>.isMultipleOf(base: Int) = createAndAddAssertion(
    DescriptionIntAssertions.IS_MULTIPLE_OF, base, { subject % base == 0 })
enum class DescriptionIntAssertions(override val value: String) : StringBasedTranslatable {
    IS_MULTIPLE_OF("is multiple of")

Typically you would put DescriptionIntAssertions into an own module (jar) so that it could be replaced (with zero performance cost) by another language representation. For instance, atrium-cc-en_GB-robstoll uses atrium-translations-en_GB whereas atrium-cc-de_CH-robstoll uses atrium-translations-de_CH.

⁉️ Using a TranslationSupplier

Next to providing translations via code you can also use a TranslationSupplier based Translator by configuring the ReporterBuilder accordingly (e.g. use withDefaultTranslationSupplier instead of withoutTranslations). Atrium supports a properties files based TranslationSupplier which is more or less what ResourceBundle provides out of the box. Yet, a Translator uses a more enhanced fallback mechanism compared to a ResourceBundle. For further technical information have a look at the KDoc of Translator.

Notice, Atrium does not yet support generating multiple reports (e.g., in different languages) in the same test run -- but Atrium is designed to support this use case. Hence, if you need this feature, then please let me know it by writing a feature request.

Let us rewrite the isEven assertion function from the section Write own Assertion Functions as second example:

fun Assert<Int>.isEven() = createAndAddAssertion(
    DescriptionCommon.IS, RawString.create(DescriptionIntAssertions.EVEN), { subject % 2 == 0 })

enum class DescriptionIntAssertions(override val value: String) : StringBasedTranslatable {
    EVEN("an even number")

Once again we have to wrap the text which we want to be able to exchange with another language into a Translatable. Since we want that the translation as such is treated as a raw string in reporting, we wrap it into a RawString as we did before.

API in a different Language

Following on the example in the previous section, we want to write isMultipleOf in such a way that one cannot only generate a report in a different language but also that one can use the function itself in a different language. Or in other words, provide our API in a different language (the same applies if you want to provide another API style).

We split up the function in two parts: API and implementation -- whereas the implementation creates the assertion and the API provides a function for the user (the API as such) and merely adds the assertion created by the implementation to the AssertionPlant.

Typically you put the API function in one module (jar) and the implementation in another (so that the API can be exchanged). In the implementation module we define, what we will call hereafter an impl-function. We follow the convention that impl-functions are prefixed with _ -- this way the chance that it shows up in code completion, e.g. when a developer starts to type is, is very low):

fun _isMultipleOf(plant: AssertionPlant<Int>, base: Int): Assertion 
    = AssertImpl.builder.createDescriptive(DescriptionIntAssertions.IS_MULTIPLE_OF, base, { plant.subject % base == 0 })

Notice that the impl-function is not an extension function as before because we do not want to pollute the API of AssertionPlant<Int> (of Assert<Int> respectively) with this function. In the above example we created a simple DescriptiveAssertion (createAndAddAssertion does the same under the hood) with a test which defines whether the assertion holds as well as a description (IS_MULTIPLE_OF) and a representation (base).

AssertImpl helps you in writing own assertion functions. I suggest you use it as entry point (rather than memorizing different class names), it guides you to existing assertion function implementations for different types as well as to other builders such as the AssertionBuilder which in turn helps you with creating assertions.

In the API module we define the extension function and call the impl-function:

fun Assert<Int>.isMultipleOf(base: Int)
    = addAssertion(_isMultipleOf(this, base))

We do no longer have to create the assertion as in the example of Write own Assertion Functions. Therefore we use the addAssertion method and call the impl-function which will create the assertion for us.

You are ready to go, creating an API in a different language -- e.g. in German -- is now only a routine piece of work:

fun Assert<Int>.istVielfachesVon(base: Int)
    = addAssertion(_isMultipleOf(this, base))
⁉️ Atrium has more layers

If you have a look at existing assertion functions try to reach the impl-function from the API then you will see that they use AssertImpl and that a few more indirections were introduced into Atrium. An API call looks more or less as follows:
API -> AssertImpl -> ServiceLoader -> Service -> Implementation

The reasons behind this are simple, you could exchange a Service with another service if you want. A service could also reuse parts of the Implementation (that is why the Service delegates to the Implementation rather than implementing it itself).


Atrium supports currently two API styles: pure fluent (cc) and infix (cc-infix) where cc exists in English and German; cc-infix only in English. All have their design focus on interoperability with code completion (thus cc) functionality of your IDE -- so that you can let your IDE do some of the work.

Atrium is built up by different modules and it is your choice which implementation you want to use. Atrium provides three modules which bundle API, translation, domain and core as well as predefined assertion verbs, so that you just have to have a dependency on that one bundle (kind a bit like a BOM pom):

Have a look at apis/ for more information and to see how the API styles differ.

Java Interoperability

Atrium provides some helper functions in case you have to deal with Java Code where not all types are non-nullable. Platform types are turned into a non-nullable version per default (if possible).

Yet, that might not be what you want, especially if you know that certain functions return potentially null or in other words, the return type of those functions should be treated as nullable in Kotlin. Therefore you want to turn the platform type into the nullable version.

You need to use a cast to do this. But depending on your return type this might be cumbersome especially if you deal with generics. Thus, Atrium provides the following functions to ease dealing with Java Code at least for some standard cases:

  • nullable turns a type into a nullable type.
  • nullableContainer turns an Iterable into an iterable with nullable entry type, likewise it does the same for Array.
  • nullableKeyMap turns a Map into a map with a nullable key type.
  • nullableValueMap turns a Map into a map with a nullable value type.


You are more than welcome to contribute:

Please have a look at for further suggestions and guidelines.

KDoc - Code Documentation

The code documentation is generated with dokka and is hosted on github-pages: KDoc of atrium

Known Limitations

According to the YAGNI principle this library does not yet offer a lot of out-of-the-box assertion functions. More functions will follow but only if they are used somewhere by someone. So, let me know if you miss something by creating a feature request. Some assertion functions which I miss myself will follow in the next version. They are listed in the Roadmap below.

Atrium does not support (yet):

  • contains assertion functions for Map (you can use assert(map.entries) in the meantime -- or keys/values if your assertion is only about keys or values)
  • infinite Iterables


You find frequently asked questions below. If your question is not answered below, then please do not hesitate and ask your question in the atrium Slack channel. In case you do not have an account for yet, then please Invite yourself.

Are there contains/any/none/all assertions for Sequence/Array?

Atrium does not provide extension function applicable to Assert<Sequence<E>> (or Array) directly, because they would basically duplicate the functions available for Iterable<E>.
However, Atrium provides asIterable so that you can turn Assert<Sequence<E>> into Assert<Iterable<E>>. An example:

assert(sequenceOf(1, 2, 3)).asIterable().contains(2)

Likewise you can turn an Assert<Array<E>>, Assert<DoubleArray> etc. into an Assert<Iterable<E>>.

⁉️ why do I not see anything about the transformation in reporting?

asIterable uses AssertImpl.changeSubject internally which is intended for not showing up in reporting. If you would like that the transformation is reflected in reporting then you can use a regular feature assertion as follows:

assert(sequenceOf(1, 2, 3)).returnValueOf(Sequence::asIterable).contains(2)

Where do I find a list of all available functions?

Atrium provides KDoc for all APIs - have a look at their KDoc:


I plan that Atrium is going to support certain features in the future. Following a rough plan (no guarantees).


  • turn Atrium into a multi-platform project, supporting JS next to JVM
  • see if I could further improve error reporting in the IDE with the help of opentest4j exceptions.


  • fix verbosity issues in conjunction with feature assertions and explanatory assertion groups.
  • A sophisticated assertion builder for toBeWithErrorTolerance for floating point numbers (so that one could extend it with relativeOf, positiveOf etc.).

0.10.0 (or 1.0.0)

  • Generating testing reports in html.
    • generate multiple reports in the same test run.
    • extension for Spek so that reporting includes the describe, it etc.

0.11.0 (or 1.1.0)

  • Inclusion of mockito's verify (so that it appears in the report as well).

Are you missing something else? Feature Requests are very welcome.


Atrium is licensed under EUPL 1.2.