Jeroen Engels

No, I haven't. I could probably in a few days (a bit busy lately), but go ahead if you feel like it in the meantime.

I solved this problem in [the equivalent `elm-review` rule](https://github.com/jfmengels/review-unused/blob/master/src/NoUnused/CustomTypeConstructors.elm#L40) by having the rule/check look for whether the type is used in the stead of a type variable that does not...

This looks like a very complex setup for your tests, and maybe it makes sense in your case, but this seems like an edge case to me. I would rather...

I agree with you, the code excerpt should not cause an error. We do lose the "assurance" that the function is at least called at some point in the code,...

I have been trying to write tests this way, and it works fine for normal cases, but I'm struggling to find a good way to find that a Promise should...

I mean, how do you write a test where you expect a Promise to be rejected? ``` js it('should reject when no arguments are passed', function(done) { lib.foo() .then(function() {...

@lo1tuma Unfortunately, your solution doesn't work, because the error thrown by the `assert.false()` statement would be catched by the following `catch`. You could then make new assertions in the catch...

Anyway, now that I have found a solution, I'm all for this rule, but the documentation should probably give tips on how to achieve this (normal case and my expected...

Sorry for kind of proposing two rules at the same time and making this confusing. My initial proposal is to have a rule that forbids having a `describe` inside of...

Hi @ngryman! Thanks for the proposal! I'm not sure that this is a good idea though, as you would lose the information/feedback about whether your other tests (in the same...