containsMatchingElement

[ayrton]

We should consider adding loose equals and loose contain assertions, these were recently intro'd in [email protected], specifically in this PR.

[vesln]

sweet.

any suggestions for the dsl? .loose.equal() and .loose.contain() is one option

[LeopoldoFu]

Seems like it is matchesElement and containsMatchingElement now.

So how about .matchesElement() and .containsMatchingElement()?

[ayrton]

From reading the documentation

• .loose.contain() would need to use containsMatchingElement
• .loose.equal() would need to use matchesElement

@lelandrichardson @ljharb what are your thoughts on the loose for the dsl?

[ljharb]

It seems like it'd be simplier to do expect(foo).to.matchElement(bar) and expect(foo).to.containMatchingElement(bar).

[benjamine]

maybe expect(foo).to.contain.matchingElement(bar) ? (following the dot-notation style of other assertions like have)

[sherwinyu]

This would be great! If no one is working on it, I may try to take a stab at it this weekend -- came looking for this feature and found this existing issue.

[ayrton]

@sherwinyu feel free to start an implementation, this is def. something we will accept as a PR. I currently like @benjamine's suggestion the most

[Drasky-Vanderhoff]

I'm new to enzyme and i just found that really want to use containMatchingElement in order to avoid restriction of getting exactly the same tag with all attributes in order to match with the one i expecting. Glad that you are considering this feature, is there any idea of when this will be implemented or someone is actually working on it ? Thanks!

[ayrton]

@Drasky-Vanderhoff no work has been started as far as I know, I also don't have a timeline as to when someone will start working on this

[wKich]

Hi. Is the matchesElement supported? I don't see implementation in PR.