No error on invalid expect?

[mikkotikkanen]

I just found out that, the current project that I'm working on, has some test cases which have typoed expects and to my dismay, these tests still pass.

fe. expect(true).be.fasle; passes with flying colors, even though it is expecting it to be something that doesn't even exist.

Isn't this something that should be fixed?

[keithamus]

Hey @mikkotikkanen thanks for the issue.

We're aware of the problem, and we're working on some solutions. Have a look at #407 which will try to throw errors if you access non-existent properties like fasle (it will use Proxies, so will be somewhat experimental). Also see #457 which is our general roadmap ticket, where I've glossed over the idea of having a legacy style interface which would ensure all methods have parens, so expect(true).to.be.true becomes expect(true).to.be.true().

I'll close this now, because of the above mentioned issues. Feel free to continue the discussion in those other issues. #407 is ready for an initial PR, so if you're comfortable with Proxies, feel free to give it a try!

[mikkotikkanen]

Kk. It would be nice if there fe. would be a switch that would force the parens to be there, so that you could opt-in to the more secure implementation of the API.