fix: do not generate non-existing paths #459
Conversation
| @@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ describe('valid-example', () => { | |||
| expect.objectContaining({ | |||
| code: 'valid-example', | |||
| message: '"self" property type should be array', | |||
| path: ['definitions', 'halRoot', '_links', 'self'], | |||
| path: ['definitions', 'halRoot', 'example', '_links', 'self'], | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is quite tricky. I still need to fix it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a bit of a different issue, fixed in 0e3844f
yet I believe the new error message we generate is actually worse than the former one, or am I wrong?
0e3844f to
20acd8e
Compare
| @@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ describe('valid-example', () => { | |||
| expect(results).toEqual([ | |||
| expect.objectContaining({ | |||
| code: 'valid-example', | |||
| message: `"ip_address" property format should match format "${format}"`, | |||
| message: `"example" property format should match format "${format}"`, // hm, ip_address is likely to be more meaningful no? | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@philsturgeon thoughts?
Once we sort this one out, it will be ready to review.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Depends? This feels like a limitation of trying to shove everything into a simple string message. We are talking about the example, but it sure could be useful to let them know its the ip_address example that is wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, exactly.
I'd expect to receive something like "ip_address" example property format should match format "${format}". Will do it this way.
* fix: do not generate non-existing paths * fix: include example path in valid-example * feat: nicer messages for valid-example rule * test: borrow mocking from feat/custom-functions branch * build: add build to karma
* fix: do not generate non-existing paths * fix: include example path in valid-example * feat: nicer messages for valid-example rule * test: borrow mocking from feat/custom-functions branch * build: add build to karma
Fixes #91
Checklist
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?