Suggest toMatchObject over toEqual(expect.objectContaining)

[garyking]

If expect().toEqual(expect.objectContaining) is the same as expect().toMatchObject() then perhaps have a rule to suggest the latter instead?

[SimenB]

I wonder if we maybe want to go the other way? Would be nice to remove toMatchObject from Jest, as the asymmetric matcher provides the needed primitive?

/cc @thymikee

[thymikee]

It's more writing though, I'm not sure if people would like it. We could start with something like prefer-object-containing though

[rdsedmundo]

Those matchers from time to time lead me into confusion with respect to each one to use, the differences between both, etc.

And it's not just me (20k views): https://stackoverflow.com/questions/45692456/whats-the-difference-between-tomatchobject-and-objectcontaining

[garyking]

@rdsedmundo Yes I absolutely agree. That's why I wrote a rule for myself, for the moment, which prefers objectContaining over toMatchObject, with the reason being that the former is more strict.

[github-actions]

🎉 This issue has been resolved in version 23.11.0 🎉

The release is available on:

• npm package (@latest dist-tag)
• GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀