Enhancement request: assertThat should take boolean alone

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Very often, developers wish to write tests against methods that return objects, 
and those objects have their own boolean methods which the developer wishes to 
use for assertion.  For example:

User user = userService.getUser();
assertTrue(user.isAdmin());

In these cases, the boolean methods are descriptive enough to supply a very 
readable line.  

For users of hamcrest, it is difficult to take advantage of these well-named 
boolean methods while consistently using assertThat.

You can either do:

assertThat(user.isAdmin(), is(true));

or

assertThat("User is admin", user.isAdmin());

The first is needlessly verbose, and the second is redudant.

It should be possible to write

assertThat(user.isAdmin());

for simple boolean methods.

I've attached a patch that makes this addition and covers it with a test.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by rod.hil...@gmail.com on 8 Sep 2010 at 2:01

Attachments:

• hamcrest-assertThat-plain-boolean.diff

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I was thinking the same thing, though arguably, this should be added to 
org.junit.Assert, not to Hamcrest.

Original comment by MatrixFrog on 2 Jul 2011 at 1:38

[GoogleCodeExporter]

You should try the junit people on this one. Hamcrest is really about matching 
and reporting differences between values.

Original comment by smgfree...@gmail.com on 27 Apr 2012 at 7:07

• Changed state: WontFix
• Added labels: Java, Type-Enhancement