# Assertions in called method detection (S2699)

**URL:** <https://community.sonarsource.com/t/assertions-in-called-method-detection-s2699/6859>\
**Category:** Suggest new features\
**Created:** [February 13, 2019, 2:17pm UTC](https://community.sonarsource.com/t/assertions-in-called-method-detection-s2699/6859 "2019-02-13T14:17:14Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![noelo](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/sonarsource/user_avatar/community.sonarsource.com/noelo/32/633_2.png) [@noelo](https://community.sonarsource.com/u/noelo)\
**Post date:** [February 13, 2019, 2:17pm UTC](https://community.sonarsource.com/t/assertions-in-called-method-detection-s2699/6859/1 "2019-02-13T14:17:14Z")

</div>

I need to perform exactly the same test on the system with just one parameter changed.  
I put all assertions in unit test class private method, which actually perform the test, and I call it with this parameter.

Unfortunately, it raises S2699 rule. I think it should not be like this, because there are assertions in this test method, just deeper. Is there a possibility for Sonar to check for assertions in called private methods and disable the violation there?

```
@Test
public void testOutputForVersion1()
{
   this.complicatedTest( 1 );
}

@Test
public void testOutputForVersion2()
{
   this.complicatedTest( 2 );
}

private void complicatedTest( final int parameter )
{
  // assertions
}
```

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![agabrys](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/sonarsource/user_avatar/community.sonarsource.com/agabrys/32/2744_2.png) [@agabrys](https://community.sonarsource.com/u/agabrys)\
**Post date:** [February 13, 2019, 8:07pm UTC](https://community.sonarsource.com/t/assertions-in-called-method-detection-s2699/6859/2 "2019-02-13T20:07:05Z")

</div>

Hello Ewa,  
I agree that such feature will be nice. Unfortunately, I think it won’t be available soon (I saw a lot of posts about this problem before). Luckily, there are better approaches to execute parameterized tests. You can use for example [JUnitParams](https://github.com/Pragmatists/JUnitParams) library.

Example:

```
package biz.gabrys.maven.plugins.css.splitter.steadystate;

import static org.assertj.core.api.Assertions.assertThat;

import org.junit.Test;
import org.junit.runner.RunWith;

import biz.gabrys.maven.plugins.css.splitter.css.Standard;
import junitparams.JUnitParamsRunner;
import junitparams.Parameters;

@RunWith(JUnitParamsRunner.class)
public final class ParserOptionsBuilderTest {

    @Test
    @Parameters(method = "allStandards")
    public void create_checkStandards(final Standard standard) {
        final ParserOptions options = new ParserOptionsBuilder().withStandard(standard).create();
        assertThat(options.getStandard()).isSameAs(standard);
    }

    public static Standard[] allStandards() {
        return Standard.values();
    }

    @Test
    @Parameters({ "true", "false" })
    public void create_checkStrict(final boolean strict) {
        final ParserOptions options = new ParserOptionsBuilder().withStrict(strict).create();
        assertThat(options.isStrict()).isEqualTo(strict);
    }

    @Test
    @Parameters({ "true", "false" })
    public void create_checkStarHack(final boolean allowed) {
        final ParserOptions options = new ParserOptionsBuilder().withStarHack(allowed).create();
        assertThat(options.isStarHackAllowed()).isEqualTo(allowed);
    }
}

```

As you see it allows you to:

- create parameters by a factory method
- convert string to parameters

Cheers

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![noelo](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/sonarsource/user_avatar/community.sonarsource.com/noelo/32/633_2.png) [@noelo](https://community.sonarsource.com/u/noelo)\
**Post date:** [February 14, 2019, 11:22am UTC](https://community.sonarsource.com/t/assertions-in-called-method-detection-s2699/6859/3 "2019-02-14T11:22:25Z")

</div>

I’m not sure if this will justify importing additional library to our project.  
Is there a feature requests list anywhere, the one on which I could vote?

I searched before posting this question and I din’t find similar topic.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![agabrys](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/sonarsource/user_avatar/community.sonarsource.com/agabrys/32/2744_2.png) [@agabrys](https://community.sonarsource.com/u/agabrys)\
**Post date:** [February 14, 2019, 4:22pm UTC](https://community.sonarsource.com/t/assertions-in-called-method-detection-s2699/6859/4 "2019-02-14T16:22:47Z")

</div>

> [@noelo](#):
>
> I’m not sure if this will justify importing additional library to our project.

As I wrote, using parameterized tests are recommended approach. JUnit 4 provides parametrized tests (not very develper-friendly), but JUnit 5 provides mechanism similar as I presented in the above example.

> [@noelo](#):
>
> I searched before posting this question and I din’t find similar topic.

There is a Jira ticket [SONARJAVA-2192](https://jira.sonarsource.com/browse/SONARJAVA-2192) which has been created at 15th March 2017. I checked it a moment ago, and this information will make you happy 😉 It has been fixed 3 days ago. SonarJava 5.11 will (it has not been released yet) solve all your problems 🙂