Fix deep object acess #1
Conversation
|
Ah, I forgot to mention, that I also removed some try to hack typescript, because they aren't needed. Wish that you use semicolons, but that is another story. ;) |
| @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ export interface RecordAckMessage extends RecordMessage { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| export interface ParseError { | |||
| parseError: boolean | |||
| parseError: true | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this breaks in node 6 sadly
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I will review this on the next weekend.
| @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ describe('message parser', () => { | |||
| } | |||
| it (`parses ${TOPIC[topic]} messages ${authAction} correctly`, () => { | |||
| const result = parse(spec.urp.value)[0] | |||
| expect(result.parseError).to.be.undefined | |||
| expect(result.parseError).to.be.an('undefined') | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
whats the difference with these out of curiosity?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This one
expect(result.parseError).to.be.undefinedhides information of an method call in an getter method called when you call an attribute. This might be fine, but on a reviewer perspective I'm not able to predict side effects or able to jump in the method, which is called by accessing the attribute. I'm also not so happy with my one, because it mixes types, which is also a problem. This one was provided as a solution on the documentation of chai in bdd style.
On my opinion the best is to switch to the assert methods which are also provided by chai. The isUndefined-method should do what expected.
Hi,
I fixed a possible deep object acess problem, where we could not predict if the first object has a value on the property. That could cause in an error thrown by the engine.
The second fix is in the test definition, where the test against undefined object did not call the awaited function. Thats why nothing is tested in these test cases.
I added
.ideafor the Intelij IDE to.gitignore. Hope this is ok.Have a nice Weekend,
Thomas