Skip to content
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

feat(options): add allowMultiple to options #55

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

jpsc
Copy link

@jpsc jpsc commented Oct 3, 2024

Specifies a boolean flag (allowMultiple) which if set to true allows reading multiple cookies with same name (key) and returning values in an array.

closes #51

jpsc and others added 2 commits October 3, 2024 11:29
Specifies a boolean flag which if set to `true` allows reading multiple cookies with same name (key) and returning values in an array.
@pi0
Copy link
Member

pi0 commented Oct 3, 2024

Thanks for PR. I am still not sure which method to go but am more towards last option (of joining with , ). because of this edge case, all code logic after this (which is a breaking change) need to check for array format.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 3, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (44b65da) to head (19a8562).
Report is 41 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main       #55   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files            1         7    +6     
  Lines          243       295   +52     
  Branches        66       114   +48     
=========================================
+ Hits           243       295   +52     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@jpsc
Copy link
Author

jpsc commented Oct 3, 2024

Thanks for PR. I am still not sure which method to go but am more towards last option (of joining with , ). because of this edge case, all code logic after this (which is a breaking change) need to check for array format.

Makes sense! Specially the breaking change part. I've updated the PR 👍

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Parse multiple cookies with same name
2 participants