mv assertion to existing test

src/__tests__/unions.test.ts

@@ -32,17 +32,29 @@ test("return valid over invalid", () => {
   });
 });
 
-test("return dirty result over aborted", () => {
+test("union with dirty result", () => {
   const result = z
     .union([z.number(), z.string().refine(() => false)])
     .safeParse("a");
   expect(result.success).toEqual(false);
   if (!result.success) {
-    expect(result.error.issues).toEqual([
+    expect(result.error.issues).toMatchObject([
       {
-        code: "custom",
-        message: "Invalid input",
-        path: [],
+        code: "invalid_union",
+        unionErrors: [
+          expect.objectContaining({
+            code: "invalid_type",
+            expected: "number",
+            received: "string",
+            path: [],
+            message: "Expected number, received string",
+          }),
+          expect.objectContaining({
+            code: "custom",
+            message: "Invalid input",
+            path: [],
+          }),
+        ],
       },
     ]);
   }
@@ -62,23 +74,3 @@ test("readonly union", async () => {
   union.parse("asdf");
   union.parse(12);
 });
-
-test("union of strict objects", async () => {
-  // ensure bug in 3.23.8 is fixed, where "dirty" parse failures would mean reporting the first error, rather than a proper `invalid_union` with `unionErrors`.
-  // Demo of bug: https://stackblitz.com/edit/stackblitz-starters-swdj3e?file=index.test.js&startScript=test
-  const union = z.union([
-    z.object({ x: z.number() }).strict(), //
-    z.object({ y: z.number() }).strict(),
-  ]);
-  expect(union.safeParse({ x: 1, y: 1 })).toMatchObject({
-    success: false,
-    error: {
-      issues: [
-        {
-          code: "invalid_union",
-          unionErrors: [expect.any(z.ZodError), expect.any(z.ZodError)],
-        },
-      ],
-    },
-  });
-});