Replies: 2 comments 2 replies
-
|
We're (historically) using |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
This bothers me too. I'd really love a version of list.Should().Contain(x => x is MyType m && m.MyProp == expected);I could write list.Should().Contain(x => x.Should().BeOfType<MyType>().Which.MyProp.Should().Be(expected)); |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Maybe we can add an overload of Contain that takes a Func instead and use the caller argument expression trick |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I would love if we could replace all We can't add public AndWhichConstraint<TAssertions, T> Contain(Func<T, bool> predicate,
[StringSyntax("CompositeFormat")] string because = "",
params object[] becauseArgs,
[CallerArgumentExpression("predicate")] string message = null)
{
return default;
}Adding public AndWhichConstraint<TAssertions, T> Contain(Func<T, bool> predicate,
[CallerArgumentExpression("predicate")] string message = null,
[StringSyntax("CompositeFormat")] string because = "",
params object[] becauseArgs)
{
return default;
}Introduces ambiguity The proposed version seems to trigger CA2241 on the caller-site, i.e. it can cause compilation errors. public AndWhichConstraint<TAssertions, T> Contain(Func<T, bool> predicate,
[StringSyntax("CompositeFormat")] string because = "",
object[] becauseArgs = null,
[CallerArgumentExpression("predicate")] string message = null)
{
return Contain(e => predicate(e), because, becauseArgs ?? []);
}
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
I specifically want to do something like
list.Should().Contain(x => x is MyType m && m.MyProp == expected). But I think my question can be generalized to pattern matching in general, or even to "Why are predicatesExpression<Func<T, bool>>s?" But this can mostly be done with the help of theCallerArgumentExpressionattribute. It will be a little bit different, and you won't get the body if you build theFuncbefore (as you can with theExpressions).Could give the
Containmethod a signature like this,I don't think it'll clash with the original signature, and it'll give us full access to all C# feature in the predicate function.
I don't know, just an idea. I solved my original problem by doing
list.Should().Contain(x => x is MyType && ((MyType)x).MyProp == expected).Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions