Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

feat(collect, expect): add .toBeAssignableTo() and .toBeAssignableWith() matchers #141

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 1, 2024

Conversation

mrazauskas
Copy link
Member

This PR is adding .toBeAssignableTo() and .toBeAssignableWith() matchers.

Real world usage shows that it is useful to check assignability both ways (similarly to >= and =<).

@jdeniau Thanks for finding better name for .toBeAssignableWith().

Copy link

Coverage summary from Codacy

See diff coverage on Codacy

Coverage variation Diff coverage
+0.03% (target: -1.00%) 100.00%
Coverage variation details
Coverable lines Covered lines Coverage
Common ancestor commit (e968247) 5274 5123 97.14%
Head commit (4de5877) 5335 (+61) 5184 (+61) 97.17% (+0.03%)

Coverage variation is the difference between the coverage for the head and common ancestor commits of the pull request branch: <coverage of head commit> - <coverage of common ancestor commit>

Diff coverage details
Coverable lines Covered lines Diff coverage
Pull request (#141) 61 61 100.00%

Diff coverage is the percentage of lines that are covered by tests out of the coverable lines that the pull request added or modified: <covered lines added or modified>/<coverable lines added or modified> * 100%

See your quality gate settings    Change summary preferences

You may notice some variations in coverage metrics with the latest Coverage engine update. For more details, visit the documentation

@mrazauskas mrazauskas enabled auto-merge (squash) March 1, 2024 12:10
@mrazauskas mrazauskas merged commit a0358e9 into main Mar 1, 2024
19 checks passed
@mrazauskas mrazauskas deleted the assignable-matchers branch March 1, 2024 12:16
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

1 participant