Additional String.Join tests

[bbowyersmyth]

Added more test cases for:

String.Join(String, String[])
String.Join(String, String[], int, int)
String.Join(String, Object[])
String.Join(String, IEnumerable<String>)
String.Join(String, IEnumerable<T>)

[dnfclas]

Hi @bbowyersmyth, I'm your friendly neighborhood .NET Foundation Pull Request Bot (You can call me DNFBOT). Thanks for your contribution!

In order for us to evaluate and accept your PR, we ask that you sign a contribution license agreement. It's all electronic and will take just minutes. I promise there's no faxing. https://cla2.dotnetfoundation.org.

TTYL, DNFBOT;

[akoeplinger]

Instead of Assert.True you can use Assert.Equal here and below. It prints a much better message when the test case fails.

[bbowyersmyth]

Sure thing. Updated this file to be consistent.

[stephentoub]

Thanks for changing all of these to be Equal instead of True. However, the first argument to Equal is meant to be the expected value, the second the actual value, so most (all?) of these need to have their arguments swapped. Otherwise, if the assert fails, the error message that gets output ends up being confusing. Could you swap them where appropriate as well?

[bbowyersmyth]

Swapped the arguments + updated some of the existing ones that were in the wrong order.

[stephentoub]

Thanks for the updates, @bbowyersmyth. I know you've submitted changes to the corefx repo in the past, but the bot is saying that you still need to sign the CLA. Maybe your previous changes were small enough that this wasn't needed? Or maybe you've changed your account in the interim or something?

[bbowyersmyth]

@stephentoub The CLA was signed on the 1st of Jan (probably your 31st Dec). I can forward you the confirmation email if that helps match things up?

[stephentoub]

@joshfree, can you help sort out why the CLA bot is marking @bbowyersmyth's PRs with "CLA required"?

[bbowyersmyth]

@stephentoub @joshfree It does say it is for project "ASP.NET MVC". Is another CLA required for corefx or is this for all MS Open Tech?

[stephentoub]

@bbowyersmyth, ah, thanks, I believe that's a different CLA. You need to complete the one specifically mentioned in the comment from the bot earlier. Thanks!

[bbowyersmyth]

@stephentoub Ok will do

[joshfree]

@stephentoub @bbowyersmyth yup - everyone signs the specific CLA for dotnetfoundation; this will cover you for /dotnet/corefx, /dotnet/coreclr, /dotnet/wcf... /Microsoft/* may use different CLAs.

[dnfclas]

@bbowyersmyth, Thanks for signing the contribution license agreement so quickly! Actual humans will now validate the agreement and then evaluate the PR.

Thanks, DNFBOT;

[stephentoub]

Thanks, @bbowyersmyth. There's probably a more consolidated way to write some of these new tests (e.g. with theories), but the style you used matches what's already there, so it's fine to stick with for now. LGTM.

[bbowyersmyth]

Yeah I tried to match the style that was there.