It seems that we need to extend the item equality comparison into <=>
I came across an error when performing an item object comparison which involved <=> instead of ==.
I think it applies to anything involving comparable types, such as string, number, etc. Our current tests only involved Switch items hence why we didn't catch it.
Related to #550
It seems that we need to extend the item equality comparison into
<=>
I came across an error when performing an item object comparison which involved <=> instead of ==. I think it applies to anything involving comparable types, such as string, number, etc. Our current tests only involved Switch items hence why we didn't catch it.