-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
API Handler Function Wrapper #501
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
Open
rmainwork
wants to merge
5
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
rm/request-handler-wrapper
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
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
This function should (hopefully) replace all the numerous calls to `mockRequest` all over the code base...
Replace calls to `mockRequest` with the new type-aware `callHandler` wrapper function
Most route handlers completely ignore the URL, so the URL itself typically hasn't been given a lot of thought when writing tests. For that reason, the initial implementation of the callHandler function simply used the API base url hard coded in. However, one or two API endpoints do retrieve parameters via URL search params - therefore support was added to pass in a subpath(including query string) to enable these API routes to also be tested using the new wrapper function
Vercel Previews Deployed
|
Extract `productSlug` and `version` request handler param types into an external file for re-use as composables. This helps ensure consistency between API endpoints as well as centralizing the source for docblock documentation (each different instance of the params had their own slightly different docblock documentation too)
* // Other assertions... | ||
* ``` | ||
*/ | ||
export const callHandler = < |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@rmainwork let's give this a more description name, so folks know that this is used on;y in testing.
Something like testRequestHandler
or createTestRequestHandler
.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Our tests contain quite a few references(and various competing implementations) of the following:
I decided this could probably be streamlined a lot more by extracting all of those
mockRequest
calls into a singlecallHandler
wrapper function which you can pass the API handler you're testing to. From there, it infers the param types (if the handler uses params) giving us automatic type hinting when testing API route handlers.I do also just want to call out that last commit I added in at the end to consolidate (where appropriate) all the API handler parameters and their respective types. It's not strictly in scope for this PR, but I was working in that general scope anyway and it wasn't too big of a lift, so I added it in.