Assert that the list is not empty - with or without Hamcrest?
collections, hamcrest, java, junit
Solution
They are the same functionality. The hamcrest provides a more English-like readable language and better error messages. In simple cases like this, I would probably just use the `assertFalse`
Problem
This is related to Checking that a List is not empty in Hamcrest I have a question over that - If we can assert the list is not empty without using Hamcrest and just using JUnit as: ``` assertFalse(list.isEmpty()); ``` Is using ``` assertThat(list.isEmpty(), is(false)); ``` or ``` assertThat((Collection)list, is(not(empty()))); ``` Worthwhile? I'm not able to understand are we gaining something using Hamcrest version in this case? Are both equivalent?