Ernesto García
Ernesto García
Indeed. Not sure how to deal with this 😕
Hi, thanks for your detailed issue report. I'd even say this is not an issue with the documentation, but with the implementation. It should work with the unenclosed inner text....
Hmmm, I just tried extending the `toHaveFormValues` tests on this repo (so far only locally in my computer, I haven't pushed anything), adding a test that specifically asserts the expected...
Thanks for taking the time to report more details. Looking forward to the reproducible example.
@davidanitoiu I'm not sure I understand your suggestion. Replace what method with what you suggest? As for the original report, I still cannot reproduce in the very tests of this...
Sorry, I never gave my feedback on it at the time, and I tried it again now. I don't see any use of `toHaveFormValues` in the couple of tests file...
I'm confused as to what the conclusion was in the above discussion? Do we think we need this matcher? Isn't it `.toHaveAttribute('role', 'dialog')` enough? (maybe it is not, if we...
I'm not entirely sure if this makes any sense, but maybe this works? https://unpkg.com/browse/@testing-library/[email protected]/dist/
Ok, let's do this. Though, TBH, I'm not sure that I can jump on it right now. Would you be able to take a crack at it?
Nice suggestion. Though I wonder what these categories could be to be really useful. For example, based on your own examples “Checking element existence” is only one matcher (`toBeInTheDocument`). It's...