How to assert if any string in a list of strings is contained in the Actual string

Question

I have the following strings:

       Actual       |   Expected
"The Actual String" | "The"
                    | "Actual"
                    | "String"
                    | "Other string"
                    |    ...

I need to create a method that will Assert that any of the Expected strings is contained in the actual string, something like this:

[TestClass]
public class UnitTest
{
    [TestMethod]
    public void TestMethod()
    {
        //Assertion Passed
        AssertContainsString("The Actual String", "The"); 

        //Assertion Passed
        AssertContainsString("The Actual String", "Something", "Actual"); 

        //Assertion Failed
        AssertContainsString("The Actual String", "Something", "Something Else"); 
    }

    public void AssertContainsString(string actual, params string[] expected)
    {

    }
}

I tried the CollectionAssert.Contains method but it didn't work. Is there a quick method I can use without iterating into the expected strings?

Answer 1

I think it's possible to use this "StringAssert.Contains(actualString,containsubstring);" in all Framework .NET

Answer 2

It returns true if all the values of expected array is found in actual variable:

bool foundall = expected.Except(actual.Split(' ')).Count()==0;

Return true even if just one value is contained in the actual string:

bool ans = expected.Except(actual.Split(' ')).Count() != expected.Length;

Answer 3

An extension method for the string class?

    public static bool AnyIn(this string s, params string[] values)
    {
        return values.Any(x => s.Contains(x));
    }

callable in this way:

    string test = "The actual string";
    if(test.AnyIn("The") == true)   // success
    ...
    if(test.AnyIn("The", "actual", "string") == true)   // success
    ...
    if(test.AnyIn("The", "actual", "value") == true)   // success
    ...
    if(test.AnyIn("some", "value") == true)   // fail

or also

    System.Diagnostics.Debug.Assert(test.AnyIn("some", "value"), "No expected string found"); // fail

of course put the extension method inside a static class
Tried also in Visual Studio 2010 Console Application

using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Text;

namespace ConsoleApplication2
{
    class Program
    {
        static void Main()
        {
            string test = "The actual string";

            // Prints False
            bool result = test.AnyIn("other", "value");
            Console.WriteLine(result.ToString()); 

            // Prints True
            result = test.AnyIn("other", "The");
            Console.WriteLine(result.ToString()); 

            //  No Assert dialog here 
            System.Diagnostics.Debug.Assert(test.AnyIn("other", "The"), "No expected values found");

            //  Big Assert dialog here with message "No expected values found"
            System.Diagnostics.Debug.Assert(test.AnyIn("other", "The"), "No expected values found");

        }

    }

    static class ext
    {
        public static bool AnyIn(this string s, params string[] values)
        {
            return values.Any(x => s.Contains(x));
        }
    }
}

EDIT:

The problem with different case could be resolved changing the extension in this way

public static bool AllIn(this string s, params string[] values)     
{         
     return values.Any(x => s.IndexOf(x + " ", StringComparison.CurrentCultureIgnoreCase) >= 0);     
}

but, to prevent false positives when one of expected strings is embedded inside the actual string you need to add a space at the end of the actual string

string test = "The actual string ";  // notice the extra space added at the end

Answer 4

if you did

if (actual.Split(' ').Contains(expected)) return true;

but I think you would still need to iterate the expected's

foreach (string ex in expected)
{
    if (actual.Split(' ').Contains(ex)) return true;
}

EDIT as per Gene S comment

expected.Any(ex => actual.Split(' ').Contains(ex))

use the sugar if you want to, but there is no processor savings, it just makes it harder to read.