Tobias Bieniek

good question... I guess right now we're a bit inconsistent in that regard 😞 what I'm wondering is if we should have something like `.isChecked({ withAriaSupport: true | false })`...

see https://github.com/simplabs/qunit-dom/blob/master/API.md#isvisible

the problem is that there are soooo many ways to make an element invisible that it's not really viable to support all of them. it's correct that the current implementation...

thanks for working on this first draft @bendemboski. we will need a bit of time to think about this though, so don't expect this to land in the very near...

hmm... I'm not sure I agree. If that `querySelector()` call returned `null` then what would you expect would happen? Passing in an element will use that element as the root...

whoops, sorry for the long radio silence here! 🙊 I tend to agree with @patsy-issa though that using test selectors or regular selectors is most of the time sufficient, and...

@houli that is the correct solution for now, yes. For `hasText()` we had a similar issue and decided to introduce a `hasAnyText()` assertion which essentially just calls `hasText()` with `{...

yes, we could. problem is that `isVisible()` never really worked properly for all cases and we're considering dropping it completely 😅

I would strongly recommend to not document this as a "really nice way to write code" because it is very error-prone, even when people are aware of the pitfalls.

> I'm curious which specific pitfalls you are thinking of my main issue is that checking `isDestroying` and `isDestroyed` is very easy to forget and I've seen a lot of...