Fix Assertion Nullability warnings

[thomhurst]

Fixes #3394

[claude]

Claude finished @thomhurst's task —— View job

---

Reviewing PR: Fix Assertion Nullability warnings

Todo List:

• Analyze changed assertion files for nullability improvements
• Review public API changes in verification files
• Check for potential bugs or issues
• Assess performance implications
• Evaluate security concerns
• Review test coverage impact
• Provide comprehensive feedback

---

Code Review Feedback

✅ Overall Assessment: Good nullability improvements

This PR successfully addresses nullability warnings in the TUnit.Assertions library while maintaining API compatibility. The changes are focused and appropriate.

📋 Detailed Analysis

Positive Changes:

1. String assertion nullability (StringEqualsAssertion.cs:12,20): Properly handles string? parameters with nullable annotation
2. Assert.That methods (Assert.cs:71,83,95): Updated to accept nullable arrays/collections with TItem[]?, List<TItem>?, IEnumerable<TItem>?
3. Null-forgiving operators (Assert.cs:74,86,98): Correctly applied value! when passing to non-nullable constructors
4. Exception mapping context (FuncAssertion.cs:46,58, TaskAssertion.cs): Added null-forgiving operators where nullability is guaranteed by context

Code Quality:

• ✅ Consistent approach: Nullability annotations are applied systematically
• ✅ Safe null handling: The use of ! operators is appropriate where context guarantees non-null
• ✅ Maintains functionality: No behavioral changes, only nullability improvements
• ✅ Public API updates: Verification files correctly reflect the nullable signature changes

Performance Impact:

• ✅ No performance regression: Changes are purely compile-time nullability annotations
• ✅ Runtime behavior unchanged: All runtime logic remains identical

Security Assessment:

• ✅ No security concerns: Changes don't introduce any security vulnerabilities
• ✅ Input validation preserved: Existing null checks and validation remain intact

Technical Observations:

1. TaskAssertion.cs:88,96,104,112,120,128: The explicit interface casting is appropriate for forwarding methods
2. Removed redundant comment (DateTimeEqualsAssertion.cs): Good cleanup of unnecessary documentation
3. API surface changes: The verified.txt files show proper nullable annotations like TItem[]? and <TValue?> in generic parameters

🔍 Minor Considerations:

1. Test coverage: While the changes appear safe, consider adding specific tests for null inputs to assertion methods if not already covered
2. Documentation consistency: The nullable annotations in method signatures should be reflected in XML documentation examples where applicable

🎯 Recommendations:

1. ✅ Merge-ready: This PR is well-executed and ready for merge
2. 📝 Consider: Adding a test case that specifically validates null handling behavior to prevent future regressions
3. 📚 Future enhancement: Consider updating XML docs to mention nullable behavior where relevant

🔧 No Issues Found:

• No potential bugs identified
• No breaking changes
• No performance concerns
• No security vulnerabilities
• Follows TUnit coding standards

This is a solid, focused PR that improves the nullability story of the assertions library without introducing any risks.