RSpec-BeEql.md

Pattern: Missing use of be(...)

Issue: -

Description

Checks for expectations where be(...) can replace eql(...).

The be matcher compares by identity while the eql matcher compares using eql?. Integers, floats, booleans, symbols, and nil can be compared by identity and therefore the be matcher is preferable as it is a more strict test.

This rule only looks for instances of expect(...).to eql(...). We do not check to_not or not_to since !eql? is more strict than !equal?. We also do not try to flag eq because if a == b, and b is comparable by identity, a is still not necessarily the same type as b since the #== operator can coerce objects for comparison.

Examples

# bad
expect(foo).to eql(1)
expect(foo).to eql(1.0)
expect(foo).to eql(true)
expect(foo).to eql(false)
expect(foo).to eql(:bar)
expect(foo).to eql(nil)

# good
expect(foo).to be(1)
expect(foo).to be(1.0)
expect(foo).to be(true)
expect(foo).to be(false)
expect(foo).to be(:bar)
expect(foo).to be(nil)

Further Reading

• RSpec - RSpec/BeEql
• http://www.rubydoc.info/gems/rubocop-rspec/RuboCop/Cop/RSpec/BeEql