SDK updates #56
SDK updates #56
Conversation
| require.Nil(t, err) | ||
|
|
||
| createUserBody := passage.CreateUserBody{ | ||
| Email: RandomEmail, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would also be good to see a test case that captures a phone number as the identifier
| require.Nil(t, err) | ||
| assert.Equal(t, RandomEmail, user.Email) | ||
|
|
||
| userByIdentifier, err := psg.GetUserByIdentifier(RandomEmail) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
RandomEmail only generates lowercase letters.
Lines 29 to 30 in e4363a9
Another test case that searches for the mixed or uppercase counterpart would be good to make sure that there is no regression when you transform to lowercase inside the GetUserByIdentifier method
There was a problem hiding this comment.
created specific all uppercase test
user.go
Outdated
| var errorText string | ||
| message := "failed to get Passage User By Identifier" | ||
| limit := 1 | ||
| ilikeIdentifier := "like:(?i)" + identifier |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm sorry for the confusion -- I meant to say that your implementation of ToLower works since we lowercase on the backend. Although this works too, if you prefer to keep the lowercase version because it is an exact matcher vs a regex matcher I would be good with that as well.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah gotcha. I am going to change it back to exact matcher since it is usually more performance than regex matcher. Thanks for the pro tip though! I did not know about the (?i).
user_test.go
Outdated
| }) | ||
| require.Nil(t, err) | ||
|
|
||
| email := strings.ToUpper(RandomEmail) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nitpick: creating the user with an uppercase email and then searching for it with the same value wouldn't necessarily prove that the search is case insensitive. If the ToUpper happened after CreateUser and before or at GetUserByIdentifier instead, it would be more accurate since this client doesn't know that the email is lowercased in the server.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good catch! They are not suppose to be the same value! Updating this
This reverts commit 95995ee.
|
No description provided.