0

In my tests I create an object and compare it to the one returned in the function using System.assertEquals. Despite all the properties being exactly the same I still get the "Assertion Failed" message when comparing objects.

Message:

System.AssertException: Assertion Failed: Expected: Attribute:[name=Name, options=null, required=false, showInUI=true, type=String, value=], Actual: Attribute:[name=Name, options=null, required=false, showInUI=true, type=String, value=]

Notice that Expected and Actual are exactly the same.

Note: all properties are primitive types except options which is a list of Strings.

  • Can you share the minimal code needed to reproduce this issue? The representation shown in a debug log message isn't always as informative as you might expect about the contents of your variables. – David Reed Jul 25 '18 at 12:50
  • 1
    If the object is an instance of a custom Apex class then you will need to implement equals and hashCode. Or better, if the check is only part of a test, implement a static equals method in the test class. – Keith C Jul 25 '18 at 12:53
0

I resolved this by overriding the equals method for my class as described in the documentation: https://developer.salesforce.com/docs/atlas.en-us.apexcode.meta/apexcode/langCon_apex_collections_maps_keys_userdefined.htm

This is what it looks like:

public Boolean equals(Object obj){
    if (obj instanceof SchemaAttribute) {
        SchemaAttribute schemaAttrObj = (SchemaAttribute) obj;
        return required == schemaAttrObj.required && 
        showInUI == schemaAttrObj.showInUI && 
        name == schemaAttrObj.name && 
        value == schemaAttrObj.value && 
        options == schemaAttrObj.options && 
        type == schemaAttrObj.type;
    }
    return false;
}
  • Just like @Keith C said. – Marijan Barišin Jul 25 '18 at 12:55
  • In the Java world, implementing only equals and not hashCode is a very bad thing as when some future code that uses the objects in sets or maps is added everything breaks and it is not clear why. So I recommend putting this code only in the test so the core object contract is not broken. – Keith C Jul 25 '18 at 13:06

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.