Describe the bug
The following assertion passes for versions ≤ 3.22.0:
import java.awt.geom.Path2D;
import static org.assertj.core.api.Assertions.assertThat;
public class Main {
@SuppressWarnings("DuplicatedCode")
public static void main(String... args) {
var path1 = new Path2D.Float();
path1.moveTo(0, 0);
path1.lineTo(10, 0);
path1.curveTo(13, 2, 13, 5, 10, 7);
path1.lineTo(0, 7);
path1.curveTo(-3, 5, -3, 2, 0, 0);
path1.closePath();
var path2 = new Path2D.Float();
path2.moveTo(0, 0);
path2.lineTo(10, 0);
path2.curveTo(13, 2, 13, 5, 10, 7);
path2.lineTo(0, 7);
path2.curveTo(-3, 5, -3, 2, 0, 0);
path2.closePath();
assertThat(path1)
.usingRecursiveComparison()
.isEqualTo(path2);
}
}But from version 3.23.0+, we get the following instead:
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.AssertionError:
Expecting actual:
java.awt.geom.Path2D$Float@6325a3ee
to be equal to:
java.awt.geom.Path2D$Float@1d16f93d
when recursively comparing field by field, but found the following difference:
Top level actual and expected objects differ:
- actual value : java.awt.geom.Path2D$Float@6325a3ee
- expected value: java.awt.geom.Path2D$Float@1d16f93d
The recursive comparison was performed with this configuration:
- no overridden equals methods were used in the comparison (except for java types)
- these types were compared with the following comparators:
- java.lang.Double -> DoubleComparator[precision=1.0E-15]
- java.lang.Float -> FloatComparator[precision=1.0E-6]
- java.nio.file.Path -> lexicographic comparator (Path natural order)
- actual and expected objects and their fields were compared field by field recursively even if they were not of the same type, this allows for example to compare a Person to a PersonDto (call strictTypeChecking(true) to change that behavior).
at Main.main(Main.java:26)
Additional context
After debugging a bit, it seems that the problem is in the RecursiveComparisonDifferenceCalculator.mustCompareFieldsRecursively():
private boolean mustCompareFieldsRecursively(DualValue dualValue) {
return !recursiveComparisonConfiguration.hasCustomComparator(dualValue) // <- evals to 'true'
&& !shouldHonorEquals(dualValue, recursiveComparisonConfiguration) // <- evals to 'true'
&& dualValue.hasNoContainerValues();
// ^
// |
// This evaluates to 'false'. I believe is because the class Path2D.Float
// has its data in arrays and not in java collection type containers.
}
- assertj core version: 3.22.0+
- java version: Java 11
- test framework version: JUnit 4
Test case reproducing the bug
Add a test case showing the bug that we can run
public class SomeTest {
@Test
public void test() {
var path1 = new Path2D.Float();
path1.moveTo(0, 0);
path1.lineTo(10, 0);
path1.curveTo(13, 2, 13, 5, 10, 7);
path1.lineTo(0, 7);
path1.curveTo(-3, 5, -3, 2, 0, 0);
path1.closePath();
var path2 = new Path2D.Float();
path2.moveTo(0, 0);
path2.lineTo(10, 0);
path2.curveTo(13, 2, 13, 5, 10, 7);
path2.lineTo(0, 7);
path2.curveTo(-3, 5, -3, 2, 0, 0);
path2.closePath();
assertThat(path1)
.usingRecursiveComparison()
.isEqualTo(path2);
}
}
Describe the bug
The following assertion passes for versions
≤ 3.22.0:But from version
3.23.0+, we get the following instead:Additional context
After debugging a bit, it seems that the problem is in the
RecursiveComparisonDifferenceCalculator.mustCompareFieldsRecursively():Test case reproducing the bug
Add a test case showing the bug that we can run