[WICKET-7069] Refactor assertTrue(equals()) using assertEquals

[Taher-Ghaleb]

I am working on research that investigates test smell refactoring in which we identify alternative implementations of test cases, study how commonly used these refactorings are, and assess how acceptable they are in practice.

The first smell is when inappropriate assertions are used, while there exist better alternatives. For example, in throws Exception using assertThrows, I refactored assertTrue(img.getName().equals("img")); using assertEquals(img.getName(), "img");.

The second smell is when exception handling can alternatively be implemented using assertion rather than annotation. For example, in ApplicationSettingsTest.java, I used assertThrows(Exception.class, () -> {...}); instead of throws Exception.

While there could be several cases like this, we aim in this pull request to get your feedback on these particular test smells and their refactorings. Thanks in advance for your input.

[solomax]

Hello @Taher-Ghaleb

please revert your commit labeled [Refactor throws Exception using assertThrows](https://github.com/apache/wicket/pull/601/commits/d667bafbb8081b87fc6dc764f7fc895b066b96d7)

It breaks the build, because:

If tests is defined as follows:

@Test
	void testExceptionOnMissingResourceDefaultValue() throws Exception

It doesn't mean it expects the Exception to be thrown
It only states some method might throw Exception so we should add try-catch OR throws Exception to satisfy compiler :)

[Taher-Ghaleb]

Thanks @solomax for your feedback.

I must have misunderstood the actual objective of these cases. I will revert that commit shortly.

In our research, we have actually encountered test cases where developers refactor exception handling operations using the assertThrows assertion (e.g., instead of using @Test(expected)). Therefore, we wanted to understand whether such refactoring is commonly acceptable in practice by developers and whether there are certain cases where it is not preferred by submitting such pull requests, but I mistakenly chose test cases with different behavior. Thanks.

[solomax]

where developers refactor exception handling operations using the assertThrows assertion (e.g., instead of using @test(expected))

AFAIK @Test(expected) is JUnit-4 way of checking exception was thrown, while assertThrows is JUnit-5 way :)))

for ex. see here: https://www.baeldung.com/junit-5-migration#1-annotations

[Taher-Ghaleb]

Should I change the title and description of the pull request to reflect the eventual changes performed?

[solomax]

Should I change the title and description of the pull request to reflect the eventual changes performed?

Yes, please :))
Additionally JIRA issue need to be created here https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/WICKET

I can take care of both steps :)

[solomax]

Thanks for the contribution @Taher-Ghaleb !