fix(expect)!: pass current equality testers to asymmetric matcher

[hi-ogawa]

Description

• closes Set comparison within expect.objectContaining fails #6820

This is breaking (making equality stricter in most cases) but this behavior probably makes more sense.

Examples

Following assertions previously passed but now it fails.

expect([new Set(['x'])]).toEqual(
  expect.arrayContaining([new Set(['y'])]),
)
expect({ foo: new Set(['x']) }).toEqual(
  expect.objectContaining({ foo: new Set(['y']) }),
)

Please don't delete this checklist! Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following:

• It's really useful if your PR references an issue where it is discussed ahead of time. If the feature is substantial or introduces breaking changes without a discussion, PR might be closed.
• Ideally, include a test that fails without this PR but passes with it.
• Please, don't make changes to pnpm-lock.yaml unless you introduce a new test example.

Tests

• Run the tests with pnpm test:ci.

Documentation

• If you introduce new functionality, document it. You can run documentation with pnpm run docs command.

Changesets

• Changes in changelog are generated from PR name. Please, make sure that it explains your changes in an understandable manner. Please, prefix changeset messages with feat:, fix:, perf:, docs:, or chore:.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for vitest-dev ready!

Built without sensitive environment variables

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	abed2de
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/vitest-dev/deploys/6722e3729b52430008792bfa
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-6825--vitest-dev.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[hi-ogawa]

TODO: see if we can keep the API same without extending arguments.

[sheremet-va]

@hi-ogawa can you resolve conflicts, please? 👀