Always use strictEqual in tests #2598
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
By switching all assertions to use `strictEqual` rather than `equal` I was able to discover three worthwhile improvements to our tests: * jashkenas#2597 * jashkenas#2596 * jashkenas#2595 I think it's a good idea to have our tests generally prefer the more explicit: `strictEqual`. Not only could it help avoid some subtle bug going unnoticed, but it also gives the reader of the test suite a more concrete description of the expected behavior.
|
👍 good stuff! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
By switching all assertions to use
strictEqualrather thanequalI was able to discover three worthwhile improvements to our tests:_.binding to a primitive returns a wrapped obj #2595I think it's a good idea to have our tests generally prefer the more explicit:
strictEqual. Not only could it help avoid some subtle bug going unnoticed, but it also gives the reader of the test suite a more concrete description of the expected behavior.At some point, after we've upgraded to a newer version of ESLint, we might even consider enableing the rule
qunit/no-assert-equal(cc @platinumazure)