aaronburro

Are there any plans to implement this? I see commits referencing this issue, but they don't seem to be supported yet (as of 3.13.2)

> @aaronburro please read the following Contributor License Agreement(CLA). If you agree with the CLA, please reply with the following information. > > ``` > @microsoft-github-policy-service agree [company="{your company}"] >...

> Thanks for your PR. It's well-scoped and easy to read. I understand the intent of your change, including that it would not be the default behavior, but I'm not...

> > Thanks for your PR. It's well-scoped and easy to read. I understand the intent of your change, including that it would not be the default behavior, but I'm...

@bheston, after digging further, A single `valueComparer` function wouldn't work, because `filterOptions` uses a `startsWith` comparison, instead of equality. I could conceivably add a more defined type for this (a...

Reading a few other issues, this seems to be in the same vein as #1093

Right, I would agree that *full* recursive clearing of invocations might be surprising and unintuitive, but: > With recursive verification, there's actually a good reason why verification of some `foo`...