)]}'
{
  "commit": "cb088dc7538c635064c3f226d8a7323d34a35da7",
  "tree": "e6fa94055d397f836cd6ced3dd0525786e48b06a",
  "parents": [
    "91a58e2293e28f6e29f09b647634596c02377559",
    "af3cfd5abea181cf5caea4023dbf98c47b02c7bd"
  ],
  "author": {
    "name": "bors",
    "email": "bors@rust-lang.org",
    "time": "Fri Nov 08 04:13:14 2024 +0000"
  },
  "committer": {
    "name": "bors",
    "email": "bors@rust-lang.org",
    "time": "Fri Nov 08 04:13:14 2024 +0000"
  },
  "message": "Auto merge of #14793 - epage:test-compare, r\u003dweihanglo\n\ndocs(test):  Document Execs assertions based on port effort\n\n### What does this PR try to resolve?\n\nCloses #14039\n\nA lot of this was pulled from #14039, common assertions people need to write, and from seeing people not noticing features that exist.\n\nI\u0027m leaving behind the `contains` assertions, rather than finding a way to make them work with snapbox.  Thankfully, snapbox is designed to let people build their own thing (see #14790).  I considered reusing snapbox\u0027s `[..]` matches but the code here is pretty minimal, the logic is similar enough, and I don\u0027t have a great abstraction for snapbox for it.  If there was more of a need, I\u0027d make something work in snapbox.  As such, the `contains` assertions are no longer deprecated.\n\nWhile doing this last pass through, I did some polish on the code as well.\n\n### How should we test and review this PR?\n\n### Additional information\n",
  "tree_diff": []
}