You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The rule no-get-by-for-checking-element-not-present is giving false positives for some matchers when it shouldn't.
If you are getting an element with getBy query and asserting something with a negated matcher, it should not complain unless the matcher is toBeInTheDocument (or additional ones checking the element itself is not present).
But if you are asserting something like expect(getByText('Submit')).not.toBeDisabled() the rule should complain about as it's not checking element absence but something else from the element.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
The rule
no-get-by-for-checking-element-not-present
is giving false positives for some matchers when it shouldn't.If you are getting an element with
getBy
query and asserting something with a negated matcher, it should not complain unless the matcher istoBeInTheDocument
(or additional ones checking the element itself is not present).But if you are asserting something like
expect(getByText('Submit')).not.toBeDisabled()
the rule should complain about as it's not checking element absence but something else from the element.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: