> Even if I like the way AssertJ handles exceptions a bit more than the 
> Hamcrest way, I never was particularly fond of never-ending fluent 
> expressions. So I would opt for the Hamcrest version.

No strong view either way as any tests are good to have :-) But I have used 
Hamcrest in the past and that’s what I’m familiar with. Niclas’ change looks 
good to me.


Reply via email to