Turn eqeq in doc comments to asserts for testing

[DZakh]

Makes it possible to change assertEqual to == in doc comments to improve readability, while keeping the test safety

[pkg-pr-new]

Open in StackBlitz

rescript

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/rescript-lang/rescript@7531

@rescript/darwin-arm64

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/rescript-lang/rescript/@rescript/darwin-arm64@7531

@rescript/darwin-x64

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/rescript-lang/rescript/@rescript/darwin-x64@7531

@rescript/linux-arm64

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/rescript-lang/rescript/@rescript/linux-arm64@7531

@rescript/linux-x64

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/rescript-lang/rescript/@rescript/linux-x64@7531

@rescript/win32-x64

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/rescript-lang/rescript/@rescript/win32-x64@7531

commit: a6e7595

[cknitt]

Nice!
So this enables additional tests that were not converted to assertEqual yet but have == in their doc comments, and all those tests are passing, right?

Next steps (in separate PRs) could then be

• convert the assertEquals back to doc comments with == (checking that the same tests are still executed)
• logging warnings about doc comments in the stdlib/runtime that don't have an == check yet?

[DZakh]

So this enables additional tests that were not converted to assertEqual yet but have == in their doc comments, and all those tests are passing, right?

Yes.

convert the assertEquals back to doc comments with == (checking that the same tests are still executed)

Yes, it would be nice to have an automatic check that the script correctly detected ==, since the parsing logic is not the most reliable. Requiring == per interface and having a warning/error for this sounds like a good solution