Allow to use regex on toHaveDisplayValue

[lourenci]

It closes #239.

All the current specs are kept. I just separate them in contexts to better describe the specs.

This implementation comes with one (good?) side effect: unordered multiple values didn't match before it.

<select id="fruits" data-testid="select" multiple>
  <option value="">Select a fruit...</option>
  <option value="ananas" selected>Ananas</option>
  <option value="banana">Banana</option>
  <option value="avocado" selected>Avocado</option>
</select>

// This was not true before this PR. It's true now.
expect(subject.queryByTestId('select')).toHaveDisplayValue([
  'Avocado',
  'Ananas',
])

Checklist:

• Documentation
• Tests
• Updated Type Definitions
• Ready to be merged
  

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #242 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##            master      #242   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           21        21           
  Lines          281       289    +8     
  Branches        68        69    +1     
=========================================
+ Hits           281       289    +8     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/to-have-display-value.js	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 17787f3...1e63854. Read the comment docs.

[gnapse]

Looks good. I only have some requests to change the approach of reusability in tests and some naming. I also need some time to reflect about this:

This implementation comes with one (good?) side effect: unordered multiple values didn't match before it.

This means that this will be a breaking change, technically speaking, right? There's nothing wrong about that, just want to be sure because we need to release it as such and with a new major version.

cc @testing-library/core-maintainers can I have your opinion on this? See the PR description where this comment appears for the full context.

[gnapse]

We'd rather not share a variable across tests. No need for this or the afterEach that resets it.

If you need to reuse the rendering part, extract it to a function in the module scope and call that function on each test that needs it.

[gnapse]

I'd rather have a fully readable name like getNumberOfMatchesBetweenArrays. Same for the variables above that store this value.

[kentcdodds]

Based on the comment above, it doesn't sound like a breaking change to me (unless someone was doing something very odd with this assertion). I think I'd be ok releasing this as a feature.

[lourenci]

This means that this will be a breaking change, technically speaking, right? There's nothing wrong about that, just want to be sure because we need to release it as such and with a new major version.

I don't think so. There is nothing in the documentation talking about that. By the way, I thought it was working in this way.

[gnapse]

🎉 This PR is included in version 5.7.0 🎉

The release is available on:

• npm package (@latest dist-tag)
• GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀