Fix wrong toHaveValue example #431
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Small fix on README.md The `.toHaveValue` example for the select verifies for `.not.toHaveValue`, but the code example has these two options selected. That means it _should_ have this value, so I removed the `.not` part to have the test example match the code example.
gnapse
approved these changes
Feb 2, 2022
|
@all-contributors please add @cbroeren for docs |
|
I've put up a pull request to add @cbroeren! 🎉 |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #431 +/- ##
=========================================
Coverage 100.00% 100.00%
=========================================
Files 26 26
Lines 621 621
Branches 228 230 +2
=========================================
Hits 621 621 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 5.16.2 🎉 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What:
Small fix on README.md
Why:
The
.toHaveValueexample for the select verifies for.not.toHaveValue, but the code example has these two options selected. That means it should have this value.How:
I removed the
.notpart to have the test example match the code example.Checklist:
TestsN/AUpdated Type DefinitionsN/A