<!-- Please provide enough information so that others can review your pull request. -->
<!-- Keep pull requests small and focused on a single change. -->
### Summary
The readme's "Rally Health" link is a 404. It appears to attempt to link to a careers page. I skillfully sniffed out a suitable careers page by scrolling down on the 404 page and clicking "careers".
### Test plan
0. Scroll to the bottom of `README.md`;
0. Middle click on "Rally Health";
0. Bask (optional).
### Summary
Bumping Jest to latest, removed inline snapshot as there's a pending bug with trailing whitespaces inside of it being removed by IDEs (solution is to make them regular snapshots, but in this case the test was just plain unnecessary)
### Test plan
CI
<!-- Please provide enough information so that others can review your pull request. -->
<!-- Keep pull requests small and focused on a single change. -->
### Summary
Users of `react-testing-library` use `rerender` wording instead of `update`. Let's make it easier for them by aliasing it.
See: https://testing-library.com/docs/react-testing-library/api#rerender
### Test plan
Added cases for JS tests and TS typings
### Summary
If I have a custom button like:
```js
<MyCustomButton handlePress={onPress} />
```
The following will not work:
```js
fireEvent(getByTestId('my-custom-button'), 'handlePress');
```
Because we are trying to call `onHandlePress`.
### Test plan
```
yarn test fireEvent
```
### Summary
Some people find it useful to search for specific terms when browsing the docs.
Specifying the concrete utility of the `update` method makes the doc more useful :)
### Summary
Currently `render` and `fireEvent` are wrapped in `act` to support hooks. This pull request wraps the update call in `act` to support testing component updates (e.g. prop changes).
### Test plan
* I have added a test for update in `__tests__/act.test.js`.
* A useEffect hook should run again on `update` calls (if the hook dependency array is satisfied).
### Summary
Check for undefined/null values, in `getByText` nodes.
Fixes#135
### Test plan
Passing tests on repro repository https://github.com/wKovacs64/rntl-161-repro.
Have no idea how to create a unit test, to test this behavior.
cc @thymikee @wKovacs64
### Summary
Given a component that renders text by composing together literal text with an inline expression for a dynamic variable, React Native will render this as a `<Text>` element with multiple children. For example:
```js
const BananaCounter = ({ numBananas }) => (
<Text>There are {numBananas} bananas in the bunch</Text>
);
const { toJSON, debug } = render(<BananaCounter numBananas={3} />);
debug();
/*
<Text>
There are
3
bananas in the bunch
</Text>
*/
expect(toJSON()).toMatchInlineSnapshot(`
<Text>
There are
3
bananas in the bunch
</Text>
`);
```
This makes sense, as the component is a:
- literal string
- a dynamic evaluation
- literal string
Unfortunately, this means that writing a test that finds an element based on that dynamic evaluation fails when using `getByText`.
```js
const { getByText } = render(<BananaCounter numBananas={3} />);
expect(getByText('There are 3 bananas in the bunch')).toBeTruthy(); // Fails
```
This is because we compare the given test string directly against `children`. https://github.com/callstack/react-native-testing-library/blob/ce3bf28f308728672bc5502e120048821c60218b/src/helpers/getByAPI.js#L23-L24
This results in comparing `'There are 3 bananas in the bunch' === ['There are ' 3, ' bananas in the bunch']`, which of course will fail.
The solution is to join children and compare the joined result against the given text string.
### Test plan
A test for this new functionality is provided!
## The devDependency [flow-bin](https://github.com/flowtype/flow-bin) was updated from `0.94.0` to `0.95.0`.
This version is **not covered** by your **current version range**.
If you don’t accept this pull request, your project will work just like it did before. However, you might be missing out on a bunch of new features, fixes and/or performance improvements from the dependency update.
---
[Find out more about this release](https://github.com/flowtype/flow-bin).
<details>
<summary>FAQ and help</summary>
There is a collection of [frequently asked questions](https://greenkeeper.io/faq.html). If those don’t help, you can always [ask the humans behind Greenkeeper](https://github.com/greenkeeperio/greenkeeper/issues/new).
</details>
---
Your [Greenkeeper](https://greenkeeper.io) bot 🌴
### Summary
I removed misleading recommendation to render components with `shallow` in snapshot tests as a result of the conversation in Issue #127.
### Test plan
Review text in API.md
### Summary
We have a security alert around `merge` so I bumped that, also upgraded to latest metro preset version (it's still Node 8 compatible), updated RN to 0.58.6
Removed the version check for Flow as we always use local version anyway.
### Test plan
Check build directory
## The devDependency [flow-bin](https://github.com/flowtype/flow-bin) was updated from `0.93.0` to `0.94.0`.
This version is **not covered** by your **current version range**.
If you don’t accept this pull request, your project will work just like it did before. However, you might be missing out on a bunch of new features, fixes and/or performance improvements from the dependency update.
---
[Find out more about this release](https://github.com/flowtype/flow-bin).
<details>
<summary>FAQ and help</summary>
There is a collection of [frequently asked questions](https://greenkeeper.io/faq.html). If those don’t help, you can always [ask the humans behind Greenkeeper](https://github.com/greenkeeperio/greenkeeper/issues/new).
</details>
---
Your [Greenkeeper](https://greenkeeper.io) bot 🌴
## The devDependency [flow-bin](https://github.com/flowtype/flow-bin) was updated from `0.88.0` to `0.89.0`.
This version is **not covered** by your **current version range**.
If you don’t accept this pull request, your project will work just like it did before. However, you might be missing out on a bunch of new features, fixes and/or performance improvements from the dependency update.
---
[Find out more about this release](https://github.com/flowtype/flow-bin).
<details>
<summary>FAQ and help</summary>
There is a collection of [frequently asked questions](https://greenkeeper.io/faq.html). If those don’t help, you can always [ask the humans behind Greenkeeper](https://github.com/greenkeeperio/greenkeeper/issues/new).
</details>
---
Your [Greenkeeper](https://greenkeeper.io) bot 🌴
* docs: Remove unused commented code
Remove unused Docusaurus defaults as [requested](https://git.io/fh9po)
by [core maintainer](https://git.io/fh9p1).
* docs: Remove unused Users page
* docs: Remove unused help page
* docs: Fix website dependencies
Add required dependencies and package attributes to avoid yarn and lint
warnings.
* docs: Add StackOverflow tag
* docs: Reinstate i18n props
While additional language translations have not been created, there did
not appear to be a reason to comment these props out.
* docs: Add docs CI script
* docs: Remove unnecessary CI config
### Summary
There is a helper that exists in `react-testing-library` to query inputs by their `placeholder`. This PR adds that support.
You **could** achieve this by querying for a `placeholder` prop, or querying for react native `TextInput`s manually and then checking their props, but it felt cleaner to have this contained in the testing library itself. It will also allow you to bypass any other instances that may have a `placeholder` prop that aren't `TextInput`s.
If we don't want to expand the surface of the library further, I completely understand that and am fine with this being closed. Just seems like it may be useful and save some time for several scenarios =)
### Test plan
+ Render a `TextInput` with a `placeholder` prop
+ Query the test instance via `getByPlaceholder` for the input
+ Verify the test instance is found
As discussed in https://github.com/callstack/react-native-testing-library/issues/96, I found that I could get RNTL working with Jest but not with Mocha. I haven't _confirmed_ it doesn't work with Mocha, but I think it would be helpful for users (like me) who don't have a strong preference which runner to use, to know that Jest could be a good first choice.
* Revert "docs: Rename api.md to API.md (#94)"
This reverts commit 53b5366393.
* Revert "docs: Fix link for api docs in read me file (#93)"
This reverts commit 86271e6ffa.
<!-- Please provide enough information so that others can review your pull request. -->
<!-- Keep pull requests small and focused on a single change. -->
### Summary
Whoopsie
### Test plan
<!-- List the steps with which we can test this change. Provide screenshots if this changes anything visual. -->
<!-- Please provide enough information so that others can review your pull request. -->
<!-- Keep pull requests small and focused on a single change. -->
### Summary
<!-- What existing problem does the pull request solve? Can you solve the issue with a different approach? -->
### Test plan
<!-- List the steps with which we can test this change. Provide screenshots if this changes anything visual. -->
Asday