Add support for Junit 4 matchers on AssertionsArgumentOrder

[adambir]

• fixes AssertionsArgumentOrder does not work with Junit 4 assertions #636

What's changed?

Added support for Junit 4 matchers in the AssertionsArgumentOrder recipe :

• assertEquals
• assertNotEquals
• assertSame
• assertNotSame

What's your motivation?

Junit 5 migration is sometimes complicated so supporting Junit 4 is a plus.

Anything in particular you'd like reviewers to focus on?

Did not add support for assertIterableEquals (does not exist in Junit 4), for assertArrayEquals and assertNull as the signature differs from Junit 5.

Checklist

• I've added unit tests to cover both positive and negative cases
• I've read and applied the recipe conventions and best practices
• I've used the IntelliJ IDEA auto-formatter on affected files

[timtebeek]

hi @adambir ; thanks for the initiative here! I'd originally left out JUnit 4 as the message argument handling there is different from JUnit Jupiter. I've placed a note on the new test to explain.

I think we could still support this provided we treat JUnit 4 and Jupiter separately, much like we also do for TestNG. Then we can separately check which indexed argument to use for the message, and which expected/actual arguments might need to be swapped. Perhaps good to update this PR to adjust the tests first, and only then look at separating those two.

[github-actions]

Some suggestions could not be made:

• src/test/java/org/openrewrite/java/testing/assertj/AssertJBestPracticesTest.java
  • lines 322-322

[adambir]

Hi @timtebeek , thanks for the review.

I reworked the PR to handle the Junit 4 assertion starting with a String message. The message should now stay in first place.
As suggested I separated the Junit5 and 4 matchers in the code. Support for assertArrayEquals and assertNull was added.

[timtebeek]

Awesome! Thanks for the well tested minimal change here!