CODEWITHSUNDEEP
javacollectionsjunithamcrest
unknown_boundaries
unknown_boundaries

Reputation: 1580

Assert that the list is not empty - with or without Hamcrest?

This is related to Checking that a List is not empty in Hamcrest

I have a question over that - If we can assert the list is not empty without using Hamcrest and just using JUnit as:

assertFalse(list.isEmpty());

Is using 

assertThat(list.isEmpty(), is(false));

or 

assertThat((Collection)list, is(not(empty())));

Worthwhile?

I'm not able to understand are we gaining something using Hamcrest version in this case? Are both equivalent?

Upvotes: 11

Views: 23203

Answers (1)

Jeff Storey
Jeff Storey

Reputation: 57192

They are the same functionality. The hamcrest provides a more English-like readable language and better error messages. In simple cases like this, I would probably just use the assertFalse

Upvotes: 11

Related Questions