Skip to content

Add advice to use fireEvent over Simulate #85

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 8, 2018

Conversation

Gpx
Copy link
Member

@Gpx Gpx commented May 8, 2018

What: Adding a paragraph recommending to use fireEvent over Simulate

Why: spectrum

How: N/A

Checklist:

  • Documentation
  • Tests N/A
  • Ready to be merged
  • Added myself to contributors table N/A

I think it's worth updating the code examples as well, what do you think?
I also don't know how to put into words the "Dan Abramov told me so" part 😀

Copy link
Member

@kentcdodds kentcdodds left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is great. Thanks!

@kentcdodds kentcdodds merged commit ad4627a into testing-library:master May 8, 2018
@kentcdodds
Copy link
Member

@alexkrolick, rats, I knew it was too good to be true, travis-deploy-once didn't work here: https://travis-ci.org/kentcdodds/react-testing-library/builds/376434153

@Gpx Gpx deleted the patch-1 branch May 8, 2018 16:11
@kentcdodds
Copy link
Member

🎉 This PR is included in version 3.1.0 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

julienw pushed a commit to julienw/react-testing-library that referenced this pull request Dec 20, 2018
…library#85)

Specifically this is so the change event can set the value of the node
in a way that works for React (and all other frameworks and
non-frameworks) nicely.

fixes: testing-library#152
lucbpz pushed a commit to lucbpz/react-testing-library that referenced this pull request Jul 26, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants