-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
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
Fix error not thrown #678
Merged
Merged
Fix error not thrown #678
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
17 changes: 17 additions & 0 deletions
17
packages/platform-sdk/test/integration-tests/sdk-v3/error-cases.test.ts
This file contains 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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ | ||
import { apiRootV3 } from '../test-utils' | ||
|
||
describe('testing error cases', () => { | ||
it('should throw error when a product type is not found', async () => { | ||
try { | ||
await apiRootV3 | ||
.productTypes() | ||
.withId({ ID: 'non-existing-id' }) | ||
.get() | ||
.execute() | ||
|
||
throw new Error('Should have thrown an error') | ||
} catch (e) { | ||
expect(e.statusCode).toEqual(404) | ||
} | ||
}) | ||
}) |
This file contains 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
Indeed it does work for me now, however I think this line shouldn't be here, the sdk call chain should be the one throwing the error when the
.execute()
is called, then we can process the error and make our checks in the.catch()
block.So aparently, try-catch will not work here because of the async nature of the builder chain, you might want to remove the try-catch and handle the error in the
.cache()
.I tried the above and it worked just fine. So we can restructure the test a bit to include the catch block instead of throwing a generic error in the
try-catch
setup.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.
Thanks for the suggestion. I checked it and there is one problem in your test: if the error is not thrown (the code before my changes), then the test would also pass. This means that it does not test my fix.
Here I explained it a bit better:
There is usually
fail()
method to fail the test if it reaches a place it shouldn't reach, but it seems to be missing in jest. If you didn‘t encounter it before, it‘s ok and I will leave the test as it is.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.
Since this is an integrated test, I want to believe that the test must fail, since the ID: 'non-existing-id' is actually a non existent ID.