This should fix #291 and adds the sameDeepMembers function that expect and should already have. If there are any issues please let me know.
The wording ("have deeply the same members") is a bit funny here. May I suggest "have the same deep members", or "have the same members - using a deep equality check".
Pushed the comment change, I went with "have the same members - using a deep equality check" since it makes it very explicit.
Looks great to me! Thanks for your efforts @cjqed. I'll wait for @logicalparadox to give the 👍 and merge then 😄.
Sounds good @keithamus . I'm probably going to tackle a few more issues that are low hanging fruits and maybe even some tougher ones, I'm just in that kind of mood (and honestly Chai has a very nice codebase!)
@vesln or @logicalparadox, you happy to see this merged in? If so I'll hit the big green button.
Oof, sorry @cjqed - one of the PRs I just merged conflicts with this one. If you could rebase this branch then I can merge it in. Should be an easy fix - some new tests were added and its just conflicting with your diff - make sure to keep both sets of tests.
Thanks for your patience @cjqed :)
Fixes issue #291, adds assert.sameDeepMembers
Changed public comment of sameDeepMemebers to be more clear
This should be ready to merge, I'll work on #313 and try to make it so that it can be automerged as well.