You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi,
there is a rule preferring toBeTruthy over toBe(true). However, the truthy matcher does type coercion, which may be unwanted. I'd appreciate a reverse rule which triggers on .toBeTruthy and enforces the use of matchers without type coercion (like .toBe(true)).
dtto for toBeFalsy.
I'm willing to make a PR if I get a go-ahead from the maintainers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi,
there is a rule preferring
toBeTruthy
overtoBe(true)
. However, the truthy matcher does type coercion, which may be unwanted. I'd appreciate a reverse rule which triggers on.toBeTruthy
and enforces the use of matchers without type coercion (like.toBe(true)
).dtto for
toBeFalsy
.I'm willing to make a PR if I get a go-ahead from the maintainers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: