added ContainsAllMatcher

[dkandalov]

I called the matcher containsAllbut there are couple problems with this name:

• this matcher is based on IsIterableContainingInAnyOrder which means "equal iterables ignoring order of elements". It's not the same as equal Set objects and not the same as Collection.containsAll.
• when used inside apply closure, it clashes with built-in containsAll function (see https://github.com/dkandalov/hamkrest/blob/c421c419294236336db8000bae1325321889208b/src/test/kotlin/com/natpryce/hamkrest/collection_matchers_tests.kt#L166-L166)

I also have doubts that current mismatch description is good. Also passing custom "equality" matcher and nested iterables API looks a bit clunky.

[npryce]

Hmmm... I think a matcher called containsAll should test the same thing as Collection.containsAll. What's the difference?

In fact, is assertThat(actual, Collection::containsAll, expected) good enough for your uses?

[dkandalov]

I agree about the name. It probably should be called something like equalToIgnoringOrder.
The difference is cases like this assertThat(listOf(1, 2, 3), !equalToIgnoringOrder(listOf(1, 2)))
but assertThat(listOf(1, 2, 3), Collection::containsAll, listOf(1, 2)).

[robfletcher]

Java Hamcrest has a matcher called containsInAnyOrder. It would make sense to name this one consistently.

[mcbeelen]

@npryce :
I hope this feature will be added.
I really like the syntax
assertThat(someCollection, containsAllInAnyOrder(someElement, anotherElement)

Avoiding the 'weird method references' in the test syntax keeps them readable.

[jensim]

I agree with @robfletcher.
I too want this function badly, because i cannot use hamcrest for containsInAnyOrder in Kotlin due to generics missmatch.

[corbym]

Please re-open this issue - containsAll is not the same as containsInAnyOrder.

Thanks