On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 03:33:43 GMT, Valerie Peng <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Weijun Wang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> be precise in method spec
>
> test/lib/jdk/test/lib/Asserts.java line 256:
>
>> 254: * @see #assertNotEqualsByteArray(byte[], byte[], String)
>> 255: */
>> 256: public static void assertNotEqualsByteArray(byte[] unexpected,
>> byte[] actual) {
>
> For inequality, would "expectedNot" or "targetValue" better than
> "unexpected"? Or is there similar wording used elsewhere that you are basing
> this on? This method can be replaced with `!assertEqualsByteArray(...)` and
> does not seem that useful to me. If you use "targetValue", this is more
> neutral name for arguments. Method name indicates whether the check is for
> equality or inequality.
FWIW, JUnit uses `unexpected`, testNG uses `expected` in assertNotEquals.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21101#discussion_r1891558337
