More fluent Map assertions

[assertj]

More fluent Map assertions

[pbetkier]

I'm currently working on this one, but I'm not sure what are the semantics of the API proposed:

.valueForKey("key2").doesNotExist()

What does it mean that a value doesn't exist for a given key? That it's set to null? Or that the key does not exist in the map?

Perhaps .valueForKey("key2").isNull() would be more explicit?

[joel-costigliola]

My thoughts:

• some Map can have a null value for a given key, thus we should have both doesNotExist and isNull.
• if given key does not exist we should throw an AssertionError since we expect it to exist.

[pbetkier]

It would be best if valueForKey method could return a subclass of AbstractAssert in context of the actual value for key. The tough part though is making assertion methods of this subclass return earlier MapAssert instead of itself.

From what I see in the code this is currently not possible without same major changes in AbstractAssert. Do you recall having such problem solved somewhere in the code base already?

An alternative is not to subclass AbstractAssert for value assertions, but provide a couple of basic assertions on their own, like isEqualTo, isNotEqualTo, isNull, and make them return MapAssert. This would not be as powerful, but would be least invasive.

[joel-costigliola]

Closing this because of #690 and #691.