Proposal: remove include() about code HOT 8 CLOSED

I need everything it does, but if you want to break it into individual use cases, that's ok.

from code.

Yes. I adhere to what @hueniverse said, can't quantify how much of those features I use though. Although most of my use cases could probably be covered by something akin to jasmine.objectContaining. Reminds me a bit of joi so maybe a better api can be found...

from code.

@cjihrig I agree it does a bit of magic right now. It would be cool to be more expressive like expect(x).to.be.an.array.containing() or expect(x).to.be.an.object.withKeys().

from code.

👍 on that

from code.

@Marsup you reacted with a "sad face" does that mean you also use it and don't want it removed?

from code.

I'm just going to leave this as is.

from code.

Since include() is basically just a call to Hoek.contain(), it might be more work and breakage than it's worth. It's not like we'd be reducing complexity, so I'd rather not break existing tests.

from code.

This thread has been automatically locked due to inactivity. Please open a new issue for related bugs or questions following the new issue template instructions.

from code.