gestalt VS AssertJ

Feel free to take a look at Gestalt for use in your library, i welcome any feedback and try and keep it up to date as possible. I have used it in a few projects at work (in production), but we have mostly moved over to Spring, so haven't been using it as much. Although i still enjoy working on it and adding new and interesting features.

I have a library Gestalt that de-serializes configuration properties into objects. It checks for a setter and uses that first, but if not found it leverages setAccessable on the field to set the value from the configuration.

This, i have a project https://github.com/gestalt-config/gestalt and the java API has 12 methods, i wanted to add another optional parameter but i didn't want 24 methods.

Thanks for including my library, Gestalt Config . it was a nice surprise to see it on the list!

Maybe not the feedback you want, but would you consider developing something that looks like plain old (and frankly beautiful) AssertJ?

AssertJ - fluent assertions

AssertJ https://github.com/assertj/assertj

Truth or AssertJ for easier assertions in tests with better exceptions

While we are at it: AssertJ is very powerful for writing assertions.

In OO you can make beautiful DSLs that allow really declarative use within that domain, e.g. test assertions in AssertJ, but everybody in the OO world is sensible enough to not try and claim OO as such being declarative. I guess they don't feel a need to try to prove the superiority of the paradigm.

AssertJ comes with a variety of assertions that can be chained together and are specific to the type of your "actual" variable.

At any rate it comes from a library called assertj.

While Hamcrest add some fluentidity to unit tests ä, I prefer the fluent assertions of AssertJ.