feat: date like objects support

[fizvlad]

Closes #182

Tbh, I just went through appearances of /(TimeLike|time_like)/ and created similar logic for date like objects :D

I'm really hesitant about whether DateTime objects should be considered date_like (although ActiveSupport defines DateTime#acts_like_date?). Since Date and DateTime are never equal, expect(Date.new(2020, 1, 1)).to eq(DateTime.new(2020, 1, 1)) will result in a confusing diff (see the spec/support/shared_examples/active_support.rb)

[fizvlad]

@mcmire, could you take a look?

[mcmire]

Hey @fizvlad! Thanks for the PR. I've looked over it and nothing stands out, but haven't had time to play with it yet.

About the confusing diff — is there anything you feel like should happen differently there?

[fizvlad]

About the confusing diff — is there anything you feel like should happen differently there?

I'm only concerned about diff making it feel like day: 14 instead of day: 31 is the only problem, while classes of expected and actual also matter. Maybe highlighting that objects got different classes would make diff better. As a user I probably wouldn't even notice this behavior, so I'm totally fine with not doing any changes :D

Current output:

       Actual output:

       ---START----------------------------------------------------------------
       F

       Failures:

         1) test passes
            Failure/Error: expect(expected).to eq(actual)

              Expected #<Date 2023-10-14> to eq #<DateTime 2023-10-31 18:22:26 +00:00 (+00:00)>.

              Diff:

              ┌ (Key) ──────────────────────────┐
              │ ‹-› in expected, not in actual  │
              │ ‹+› in actual, not in expected  │
              │ ‹ › in both expected and actual │
              └─────────────────────────────────┘

                #<Date {
                  year: 2023,
                  month: 10,
              -   day: 31
              +   day: 14
                }>
            # ./lib/super_diff/rspec/monkey_patches.rb:43:in `handle_failure'
            # ./tmp/integration_spec.rb:16:in `block (2 levels) in <top (required)>'

       Finished in 0.02233 seconds (files took 0.575 seconds to load)
       1 example, 1 failure

       Failed examples:

       rspec ./tmp/integration_spec.rb:13 # test passes
       ---END------------------------------------------------------------------

[fizvlad]

Rebased the branch to resolve merge conflicts

[fizvlad]

Specs with no_rails were failing since date is not required by default (resolved by adding require "date") and DateTime only have special inspect with ActiveSupport (moved specs to active_support folfer)

[fizvlad]

Hey, @mcmire ! Could you take another look?

[mcmire]

Hey @fizvlad! Sorry for the long delay on this. I think I can fix that diff issue you mentioned but the rest of this seemed fine! Thanks again for the PR.

[mcmire]

This feature has been included in v0.11.0. Thanks again!