ryanmarcotte / functional.utilities Goto Github PK

It has been proposed to include extension methods for Task<Option<T>> and Task<Result<TSuccess, TFailure>>. I am open to the idea, but would like to discuss approaches first.

I had been wondering about the exclusion of Task<T> assertions in the FluentAssertions library, and - as far as I can tell - they are not included because the maintenance burden would be high: all synchronous methods would have a duplicate asynchronous equivalent. See fluentassertions/fluentassertions#1305 (comment) for more information.

To date, I have been using the following syntax:

(await option).Should().HaveValue().AndValue.Should().Be(...);
(await result).Should().BeSuccessful().AndSuccessValue.Should().Be(...);

I'd like to gather other thoughts before any code is written. The fact that FluentAssertions does not have an extensive set of Task<T>-related assertions means there are compromises to be made here, as the following syntax is not possible:

await Option.Some(1337)
    .Should()
    .HaveValue()
    .AndValue() // fine up to this point
    .Should() // FluentAssertions does not define a BeGreaterThan extension method for Task<int>
    .BeGreaterThan(...);

FluentAssertions 6.0.0 has been released! Both Functional.Primitives.FluentAssertions and Functional.Unions.FluentAssertions depend on FluentAssertions 5.x.x. As part of upgrading to FluentAssertions 6.0.0, we will be incrementing the major version number of both Functional.Primitives.FluentAssertions and Functional.Union.FluentAssertions. Now would be the time to make breaking changes if desired.

The Functional suite of libraries provides a Functional.Unions package that defines discriminated union types. Create a new Functional.Unions.FluentAssertions NuGet package.