Transform existing ->and() calls to expect()

[pxlrbt]

Follow up to #4

I realized while the new merge_different_variables option does not transform expect() to ->and() it keeps existing ->and() calls which causes a non-uniform syntax. Added a method to also transform existing code.

Let me know what you think.

[MrPunyapal]

I think new rule will be good? 👀

[pxlrbt]

It's the same behavior as the original configuration only that this also transforms existing ->and() calls ones while the current option only keeps existing expect()s. The goal is the same: No ->and() in the code base.

Maybe it should have been a separate rule from the beginning then? But I think they have a lot of overlap. Would you still move everything to a new rule? What about naming? ChainExpectCallsWithoutAnd?

[MrPunyapal]

I was wondering new rule for making expect() from ->and() which will be not part of any sets.

That way rule cannot touch default behaviour and it will be useful for everyone who do not want to use ->and().

[pxlrbt]

I'll look into it.

[pxlrbt]

@MrPunyapal I updated the PR and move the logic to a new ConvertAndToExpectRector. What do you think?