Fixed bug in "prev" / "next" on obs page.

[pellaea]

I don't know how to test this. There is already a test of this functionality. The problem is the old code relied on redirect_to returning something truthy. But this is not reliable apparently. But reliable enough that tests were passing.

[coveralls]

coverage: 94.43%. remained the same
when pulling 99edba7 on fix-flow-bug
into bc4d6cb on main.

[nimmolo]

Does redirect_to_next_object have a fallback if the object at :id has been deleted? (asking from phone, sorry). That was the issue, right?

[pellaea]

Nope, that wasn't the issue. The object existed. The code in question was: ``` def show pass_query_params store_location case params[:flow] when "next" redirect_to_next_object(:next, Observation, params[:id]) and return when "prev" redirect_to_next_object(:prev, Observation, params[:id]) and return end check_if_user_wants_to_make_their_votes_public check_if_user_wants_to_change_thumbnail_size ... ``` See how it is supposed to return after the redirect? Usually it does. Like in the tests it seems to do so every time. But in the wild, it would occasionally fail to do so, and then attempt to both redirect and the later render the obs page, and that's when it failed.

…

-Jason

On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 7:51 PM andrew nimmo ***@***.***> wrote: Does redirect_to_next_object have a fallback if the object at :id has been deleted? (asking from phone, sorry). That was the issue, right? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2006 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAYTNNLVLEW44D3NQK7VHTDYW62XVAVCNFSM6AAAAABEKAZ3QCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSOBSGEZTQOJSGU> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>