feat(linter/eslint-plugin-vitest): implement prefer-to-be-truthy

[shulaoda]

Related to #4656

[graphite-app]

Your org has enabled the Graphite merge queue for merging into main

Add the label “merge” to the PR and Graphite will automatically add it to the merge queue when it’s ready to merge. Or use the label “hotfix” to add to the merge queue as a hot fix.

You must have a Graphite account and log in to Graphite in order to use the merge queue. Sign up using this link.

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #4755 will not alter performance

_{Comparing shulaoda:feat/vitest-prefer-to-be-truthy (8b0c8a0) with main (790c551)}

Summary

✅ 29 untouched benchmarks

[shulaoda]

I tried using jest's utilities for rapid development, but found that there seemed to be some differences in the APIs between jest and vitest. Jest does not support expectTypeof. Should I rewrite a vitest parser or simply modify the type of jest (which has a wide range of side effects)? @mysteryven

[shulaoda]

The difference in rules between jest and vitest is not significant, and I may be able to make simple modifications to jest utilities for unified use.

[mysteryven]

The difference in rules between jest and vitest is not significant, and I may be able to make simple modifications to jest utilities for unified use.

Most of them are the same, simply modifying is preferred, even it may make the code ugly :(

[mysteryven]

Thank you! I am thinking whether we should move parse_jest_fn_call to parse_test_fn_call, and derive parse_jest_fn_call and parse_vitest_fn_call from it? Feel likes extends expectTypeOf in jest is a bit of a mess.

And need DonIsaac's review.👀

[shulaoda]

Thank you! I am thinking whether we should move parse_jest_fn_call to parse_test_fn_call, and derive parse_jest_fn_call and parse_vitest_fn_call from it? Feel likes extends expectTypeOf in jest is a bit of a mess.

The current difference between them is too small. If necessary, I can implement it in the next related PR, which won't be too long.

[DonIsaac]

LGTM, I'll let @mysteryven merge when he's happy with it.

[mysteryven]

I can implement it in the next related PR

It didn't influence other jest rules currently, let's follow the current step and refactor it when needed :)

[mysteryven]

Thank you!