java.lang.AssertionError: Expected: is "20091021121000 -0700" but: was "20091021101000 +0000"

Spring JIRA | Sam Brannen | 4 years ago
tip
Your exception is missing from the Samebug knowledge base.
Here are the best solutions we found on the Internet.
Click on the to mark the helpful solution and get rewards for you help.
  1. 0

    h4. Status Quo {{DateTimeFormatterFactory}} provides a {{timeZone}} property; however, this property is currently ignored. This was unfortunately overlooked due to a false positive in the corresponding unit test (i.e., {{DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.shouldGetWithTimeZone()}}). Specifically, the author of the test and the Spring CI server happen to reside in the same time zone, thereby masking the problem. When {{DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.shouldGetWithTimeZone()}} is executed in a timezone other than "-0700", the test fails. For example, when executed in timezone "+0200", the test results in the following error. {noformat} java.lang.AssertionError: Expected: is "20091021121000 -0700" but: was "20091021121000 +0200" at org.hamcrest.MatcherAssert.assertThat(MatcherAssert.java:20) at org.junit.Assert.assertThat(Assert.java:962) at org.junit.Assert.assertThat(Assert.java:924) at org.springframework.format.datetime.joda.DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.shouldGetWithTimeZone(DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.java:98) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597) at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:46) at org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:15) at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:43) at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.InvokeMethod.evaluate(InvokeMethod.java:20) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:270) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:70) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:49) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:238) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:62) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:236) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:52) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:229) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:307) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit4.runner.JUnit4TestReference.run(JUnit4TestReference.java:50) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.TestExecution.run(TestExecution.java:38) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:467) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:683) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.run(RemoteTestRunner.java:390) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.main(RemoteTestRunner.java:197) {noformat} h4. Analysis The following is the implementation of {{DateTimeFormatterFactory.getDateTimeFormatter(DateTimeFormatter)}} as of Spring 3.2 RC1. {code} public DateTimeFormatter getDateTimeFormatter(DateTimeFormatter fallbackFormatter) { DateTimeFormatter dateTimeFormatter = createDateTimeFormatter(); if(dateTimeFormatter != null && this.timeZone != null) { dateTimeFormatter.withZone(DateTimeZone.forTimeZone(this.timeZone)); } return (dateTimeFormatter != null ? dateTimeFormatter : fallbackFormatter); } {code} So although {{withZone()}} is invoked, it has no effect. It is therefore assumed that the following was the intended implementation. {code} public DateTimeFormatter getDateTimeFormatter(DateTimeFormatter fallbackFormatter) { DateTimeFormatter dateTimeFormatter = createDateTimeFormatter(); if(dateTimeFormatter != null && this.timeZone != null) { dateTimeFormatter = dateTimeFormatter.withZone(DateTimeZone.forTimeZone(this.timeZone)); } return (dateTimeFormatter != null ? dateTimeFormatter : fallbackFormatter); } {code} However, even with the above change, {{DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.shouldGetWithTimeZone()}} still fails with the following stack trace. {noformat} java.lang.AssertionError: Expected: is "20091021121000 -0700" but: was "20091021101000 +0000" at org.hamcrest.MatcherAssert.assertThat(MatcherAssert.java:20) at org.junit.Assert.assertThat(Assert.java:962) at org.junit.Assert.assertThat(Assert.java:924) at org.springframework.format.datetime.joda.DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.shouldGetWithTimeZone(DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.java:98) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597) at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:46) at org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:15) at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:43) at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.InvokeMethod.evaluate(InvokeMethod.java:20) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:270) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:70) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:49) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:238) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:62) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:236) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:52) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:229) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:307) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit4.runner.JUnit4TestReference.run(JUnit4TestReference.java:50) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.TestExecution.run(TestExecution.java:38) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:467) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:683) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.run(RemoteTestRunner.java:390) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.main(RemoteTestRunner.java:197) {noformat} h4. Deliverables # (/) Honor the {{timeZone}} property in {{DateTimeFormatterFactory.getDateTimeFormatter(DateTimeFormatter)}} # (/) Rewrite {{DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.shouldGetWithTimeZone()}} so that it does not test against the default timezone

    Spring JIRA | 4 years ago | Sam Brannen
    java.lang.AssertionError: Expected: is "20091021121000 -0700" but: was "20091021101000 +0000"
  2. 0

    h4. Status Quo {{DateTimeFormatterFactory}} provides a {{timeZone}} property; however, this property is currently ignored. This was unfortunately overlooked due to a false positive in the corresponding unit test (i.e., {{DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.shouldGetWithTimeZone()}}). Specifically, the author of the test and the Spring CI server happen to reside in the same time zone, thereby masking the problem. When {{DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.shouldGetWithTimeZone()}} is executed in a timezone other than "-0700", the test fails. For example, when executed in timezone "+0200", the test results in the following error. {noformat} java.lang.AssertionError: Expected: is "20091021121000 -0700" but: was "20091021121000 +0200" at org.hamcrest.MatcherAssert.assertThat(MatcherAssert.java:20) at org.junit.Assert.assertThat(Assert.java:962) at org.junit.Assert.assertThat(Assert.java:924) at org.springframework.format.datetime.joda.DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.shouldGetWithTimeZone(DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.java:98) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597) at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:46) at org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:15) at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:43) at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.InvokeMethod.evaluate(InvokeMethod.java:20) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:270) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:70) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:49) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:238) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:62) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:236) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:52) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:229) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:307) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit4.runner.JUnit4TestReference.run(JUnit4TestReference.java:50) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.TestExecution.run(TestExecution.java:38) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:467) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:683) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.run(RemoteTestRunner.java:390) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.main(RemoteTestRunner.java:197) {noformat} h4. Analysis The following is the implementation of {{DateTimeFormatterFactory.getDateTimeFormatter(DateTimeFormatter)}} as of Spring 3.2 RC1. {code} public DateTimeFormatter getDateTimeFormatter(DateTimeFormatter fallbackFormatter) { DateTimeFormatter dateTimeFormatter = createDateTimeFormatter(); if(dateTimeFormatter != null && this.timeZone != null) { dateTimeFormatter.withZone(DateTimeZone.forTimeZone(this.timeZone)); } return (dateTimeFormatter != null ? dateTimeFormatter : fallbackFormatter); } {code} So although {{withZone()}} is invoked, it has no effect. It is therefore assumed that the following was the intended implementation. {code} public DateTimeFormatter getDateTimeFormatter(DateTimeFormatter fallbackFormatter) { DateTimeFormatter dateTimeFormatter = createDateTimeFormatter(); if(dateTimeFormatter != null && this.timeZone != null) { dateTimeFormatter = dateTimeFormatter.withZone(DateTimeZone.forTimeZone(this.timeZone)); } return (dateTimeFormatter != null ? dateTimeFormatter : fallbackFormatter); } {code} However, even with the above change, {{DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.shouldGetWithTimeZone()}} still fails with the following stack trace. {noformat} java.lang.AssertionError: Expected: is "20091021121000 -0700" but: was "20091021101000 +0000" at org.hamcrest.MatcherAssert.assertThat(MatcherAssert.java:20) at org.junit.Assert.assertThat(Assert.java:962) at org.junit.Assert.assertThat(Assert.java:924) at org.springframework.format.datetime.joda.DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.shouldGetWithTimeZone(DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.java:98) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39) at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25) at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597) at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:46) at org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:15) at org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:43) at org.junit.internal.runners.statements.InvokeMethod.evaluate(InvokeMethod.java:20) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:270) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:70) at org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:49) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:238) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:62) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:236) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:52) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:229) at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:307) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit4.runner.JUnit4TestReference.run(JUnit4TestReference.java:50) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.TestExecution.run(TestExecution.java:38) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:467) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:683) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.run(RemoteTestRunner.java:390) at org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.main(RemoteTestRunner.java:197) {noformat} h4. Deliverables # (/) Honor the {{timeZone}} property in {{DateTimeFormatterFactory.getDateTimeFormatter(DateTimeFormatter)}} # (/) Rewrite {{DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.shouldGetWithTimeZone()}} so that it does not test against the default timezone

    Spring JIRA | 4 years ago | Sam Brannen
    java.lang.AssertionError: Expected: is "20091021121000 -0700" but: was "20091021101000 +0000"
  3. 0

    DataflowAssert doesn't pass TableRow test

    Stack Overflow | 2 years ago | Jorge Z
    java.lang.AssertionError: Expected: iterable over [<{id=x}>] in any order but: Not matched: <{id=x}>
  4. Speed up your debug routine!

    Automated exception search integrated into your IDE

  5. 0

    GitHub comment 5590#30294436

    GitHub | 3 years ago | wildfly-ci
    java.lang.AssertionError: Expected: a string containing "JBAS010881: There is already a deployment called simple1 with the same runtime name SimpleServlet.war on server group main-server-group" but: was "{"JBAS014653: Composite operation failed and was rolled back. Steps that failed:" => {"Operation step-2" => {"JBAS014653: Composite operation failed and was rolled back. Steps that failed:" => {"Operation step-1" => "JBAS018785: There is already a deployment called simple1 with the same runtime name SimpleServlet.war"}}}} "
  6. 0

    Master@HEAD fails `gradle check`

    GitHub | 2 years ago | utensil
    java.lang.AssertionError: seeds of -1 give rise to same encodings Expected: is not [<0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>] but: was [<0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <1>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>, <0>]

  1. olle.hallin 2 times, last 2 days ago
  2. marcbouvierdav 1 times, last 2 weeks ago
  3. rsprangemeijer 1 times, last 2 weeks ago
  4. Adrien 15 times, last 3 months ago
  5. jpvee 53 times, last 4 months ago
8 more registered users
3 unregistered visitors
Not finding the right solution?
Take a tour to get the most out of Samebug.

Tired of useless tips?

Automated exception search integrated into your IDE

Root Cause Analysis

  1. java.lang.AssertionError

    Expected: is "20091021121000 -0700" but: was "20091021101000 +0000"

    at org.hamcrest.MatcherAssert.assertThat()
  2. Hamcrest
    MatcherAssert.assertThat
    1. org.hamcrest.MatcherAssert.assertThat(MatcherAssert.java:20)
    1 frame
  3. JUnit
    Assert.assertThat
    1. org.junit.Assert.assertThat(Assert.java:962)
    2. org.junit.Assert.assertThat(Assert.java:924)
    2 frames
  4. Spring Context
    DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.shouldGetWithTimeZone
    1. org.springframework.format.datetime.joda.DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.shouldGetWithTimeZone(DateTimeFormatterFactoryTests.java:98)
    1 frame
  5. Java RT
    Method.invoke
    1. sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
    2. sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39)
    3. sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25)
    4. java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:597)
    4 frames
  6. JUnit
    ParentRunner.run
    1. org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:46)
    2. org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:15)
    3. org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:43)
    4. org.junit.internal.runners.statements.InvokeMethod.evaluate(InvokeMethod.java:20)
    5. org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:270)
    6. org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:70)
    7. org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:49)
    8. org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.run(ParentRunner.java:238)
    9. org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:62)
    10. org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:236)
    11. org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$000(ParentRunner.java:52)
    12. org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$2.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:229)
    13. org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.run(ParentRunner.java:307)
    13 frames
  7. JUnit4 Runner
    JUnit4TestReference.run
    1. org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit4.runner.JUnit4TestReference.run(JUnit4TestReference.java:50)
    1 frame
  8. JUnit3 Runner
    RemoteTestRunner.main
    1. org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.TestExecution.run(TestExecution.java:38)
    2. org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:467)
    3. org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:683)
    4. org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.run(RemoteTestRunner.java:390)
    5. org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.main(RemoteTestRunner.java:197)
    5 frames