Support Immutable with chai's property assertions

[scottnonnenberg]

Property and deep property assertions, because I really like that syntax when I use chai with plain objects. :0)

var obj = Immutable.fromJS({ x: 1 });
expect(obj).to.have.property('x', 1);

var obj = Immutable.fromJS({ x: 1, y: { x: 2, y: 3 } });
expect(obj).to.have.deep.property(['y', 'x'], 2);

Based on original property() here: https://github.com/chaijs/chai/blob/8e8a728921085351ecd050cd606b2ef6a1fb1338/lib/chai/core/assertions.js#L881

Like other methods in chai-immutable, falls back to original chai methods if the target object is not isIterable().

100% code coverage for newly-added code. Also, I noticed that changing chai.config.truncateThreshold can make display of Immutable objects a lot nicer.

[scottnonnenberg]

Fixes #9, #41, #14.

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.3%) to 98.315% when pulling 56eaf4a on scottnonnenberg:property into 655d187 on astorije:master.

[astorije]

Waouh @scottnonnenberg, thanks a lot for this, it looks like tremendous work! As a matter of fact, this is something I wanted to tackle fairly soon as I saw different requests about it coming up.
Give me a few days to review thoroughly and get back to you, and feel free to ping here if you think I forgot.

Hey what the hell @coveralls, you commenting here is supposed to be disabled!

[scottnonnenberg]

Ping! :0)

[astorije]

For alphabetical sorting consistency, would you mind moving this addition between keys and size, in the BDD reference section of the code please?

[astorije]

Note that providing a custom message is not available in any other assertion of this plugin. I would prefer we don't include it in this PR for this assertion only.
If you really need custom messages, you can open an issue to solve that globally and we'll start with this assertion.

Does that make sense?

[astorije]

Could you follow the same pattern as other assertions, that is, having this check as high in the function as possible and returning _super.apply(this, arguments); in an else statement at the very end?
Probably not the nicest way to do so, but at least consistent with the rest of the file.

[astorije]

Hey @scottnonnenberg, sorry for being silent, busy and all.
I started briefly looking into your work, it's awesome, gonna be a great addition to the plugin!

The biggest thing I need to address with you is the format of the deep properties.
Chai "use[s] dot- and bracket-notation for deep references into objects and arrays", while you went for the same argument as passed to Iterable#getIn(). Since this plugin aims at providing transparent Chai assertions for Immutable, I mention using same notation as Chai's in #14. My questions are as follows:

• Why did you choose one over the other?
• Is there an easy equivalence between the getIn notation and the dot/bracket-notation, specifically for the indices? I don't see the use of indices in your tests.

Depending on these questions, I think we could either switch to the dot/bracket-notation or, if the getIn notation makes sense (it's more of a use case question than a technical one), if we can convert one to the other when receiving it as an input.

[scottnonnenberg]

Quick split() call and we support both! :0)

[astorije]

Great work, @scottnonnenberg! Could you squash your commits into one commit before I can merge, please?

[scottnonnenberg]

Squash complete!

[astorije]

Awesome, 👍 and merging!

[JalilArfaoui]

Hello both, Fantastic work !
Could you release a new version ?
I'm using latest npm (1.5.4) which does not support this ...

[astorije]

@JalilArfaoui Will do ASAP, I need to update the doc first. Stay tuned 😄

[astorije]

@JalilArfaoui, this was finally released in v1.6.0: https://github.com/astorije/chai-immutable/releases/tag/v1.6.0