Describe the bug
When doing a containsExactly on a ListAssert,
only for the case that all elements are there but the order is wrong (like, containsExactlyInAnyOrder would pass but containsExactly would not),
there will be a UnknownFormatConversionException if a % is part of the data.
- assertj core version: 3.24.2
- java version: 17.0.9
- test framework version: junit 5.10
Test case reproducing the bug
@Test
void fails() {
var actual = List.of("xxx", "%");
// passes
assertThat(actual).containsExactlyInAnyOrder("%", "xxx");
// fails with UnknownFormatConversionException
assertThat(actual).containsExactly("%", "xxx");
}The stacktrace:
java.util.UnknownFormatConversionException: Conversion = '"'
at java.base/java.util.Formatter.parse(Formatter.java:2750)
at java.base/java.util.Formatter.format(Formatter.java:2671)
at java.base/java.util.Formatter.format(Formatter.java:2625)
at java.base/java.lang.String.format(String.java:4145)
at org.assertj.core.util.Strings.formatIfArgs(Strings.java:86)
at org.assertj.core.error.MessageFormatter.format(MessageFormatter.java:62)
at org.assertj.core.error.BasicErrorMessageFactory.create(BasicErrorMessageFactory.java:107)
at org.assertj.core.internal.Failures.assertionErrorMessage(Failures.java:144)
at org.assertj.core.internal.Failures.failure(Failures.java:133)
at org.assertj.core.internal.Iterables.shouldContainExactlyWithIndexAssertionError(Iterables.java:1169)
at org.assertj.core.internal.Iterables.assertElementOrder(Iterables.java:1150)
at org.assertj.core.internal.Iterables.assertContainsExactly(Iterables.java:1137)
at org.assertj.core.api.AbstractIterableAssert.containsExactlyForProxy(AbstractIterableAssert.java:427)
at org.assertj.core.api.AbstractIterableAssert.containsExactly(AbstractIterableAssert.java:420)
Describe the bug
When doing a
containsExactlyon a ListAssert,only for the case that all elements are there but the order is wrong (like,
containsExactlyInAnyOrderwould pass butcontainsExactlywould not),there will be a
UnknownFormatConversionExceptionif a%is part of the data.Test case reproducing the bug
The stacktrace: