Test check API #7
Conversation
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThis pull request updates the application’s check processing logic by modifying the Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant App as App (Console)
participant API as Checks API
App->>API: Retrieve check details (JSON)
App->>API: List all checks
App->>API: Delete check (using checkResponse.Id)
API-->>App: Return deletion confirmation
App->>API: Retrieve check status (post-deletion)
API-->>App: Return cancellation info / not found
App->>App: Log results and pause execution
✨ Finishing Touches
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
Coverage Report
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Nitpick comments (5)
src/ConsoleApp/App.cs (2)
117-118: Consider making use of the retrieved check listYou're retrieving a list of checks but not using the results. Consider either removing this line if it's not needed, or use the retrieved data to verify the check's presence before deletion.
119-126: Good addition of check deletion and verification workflowThe added code correctly demonstrates a complete check lifecycle, including deletion and verification of the deleted state. This is useful for testing the API's functionality.
Consider adding error handling around the final
GetAsynccall since it might throw an exception if the check is truly deleted and the API returns a non-200 status.- var getResponse2 = await _postGrid.Checks.GetAsync(checkResponse.Id); - Console.WriteLine($"Check after delete: {getResponse2}"); + try + { + var getResponse2 = await _postGrid.Checks.GetAsync(checkResponse.Id); + Console.WriteLine($"Check after delete: {getResponse2}"); + } + catch (PostGridException ex) + { + Console.WriteLine($"Expected error retrieving deleted check: {ex.Message}"); + }src/Tests/ChecksTests.cs (3)
1-125:CreateCheck_Successfulmethod coverage
The test method thoroughly verifies the request creation and checks the response fields. Consider adding edge-case coverage (e.g., amounts of zero or negative values) for broader validation.
127-226:GetCheck_Successfulmethod coverage
Retrieval testing looks correct. The test ensures the response matches all expected properties. Good coverage. Consider adding a test for missing or invalid check IDs if not already covered elsewhere.
228-339:ListChecks_Successfulmethod coverage
The list operation’s response is validated well, including pagination fields and result data. Optionally, test additional optional or nullable fields such ascarrierTrackingif needed.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (11)
src/ConsoleApp/App.cs(1 hunks)src/Project/Checks/CheckCancellationInfo.cs(1 hunks)src/Project/Checks/CheckResponse.cs(1 hunks)src/Project/Contacts/ContactBaseResponse.cs(1 hunks)src/Project/Contacts/ContactResponse.cs(1 hunks)src/Tests/ApiApprovalTests.PublicApi.approved.txt(4 hunks)src/Tests/BankAccountsTests.cs(4 hunks)src/Tests/ChecksTests.cs(1 hunks)src/Tests/ContactsTests.cs(1 hunks)src/Tests/PostGridTestBase.cs(2 hunks)src/Tests/ShoudlyTestExtensions.cs(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (25)
src/Tests/ContactsTests.cs (1)
336-336: LGTM!The formatting change to move the opening brace to the same line as the
await foreachstatement improves code consistency with modern C# styling practices.src/Tests/ShoudlyTestExtensions.cs (2)
20-28: LGTM!The formatting changes to move braces to the same line as the loop/conditional statements improve code consistency and readability.
42-59: LGTM!The consistent formatting changes applied throughout the method make the code more readable and align with the project's coding style.
src/Project/Checks/CheckCancellationInfo.cs (1)
1-17: LGTM! Well-structured model for check cancellationThe
CheckCancellationInfoclass is well-designed with:
- Clear, descriptive XML documentation
- Appropriate use of
requiredmodifier for mandatory properties- Logical property names that clearly indicate their purpose
This model will provide structured data for check cancellations, improving API usability.
src/Project/Contacts/ContactResponse.cs (1)
22-31: Timestamp properties added appropriately.The addition of
CreatedAtandUpdatedAtproperties is well-implemented with proper XML documentation and correct use ofrequiredmodifier with DateTimeOffset type.src/Tests/PostGridTestBase.cs (2)
1-1: Organizational improvement.Moving the System.Collections.Generic import to the top follows a common convention of ordering System imports first.
58-58: Consistent spacing.Adding this blank line improves code readability by providing clear separation between configuration sections.
src/Project/Contacts/ContactBaseResponse.cs (1)
48-51: Good addition of Country property.This property complements the existing
CountryCodeproperty by providing the full country name, which is more user-friendly for display purposes.src/Project/Checks/CheckResponse.cs (3)
122-135: Comprehensive document metadata properties added.The addition of
Envelope,Size, andPageCountproperties provides valuable metadata about the physical characteristics of the check document. These properties are well-documented and have appropriate nullability based on their requirements.
137-146: Lifecycle tracking timestamps added.The addition of
CreatedAtandUpdatedAtproperties is consistent with the changes made toContactResponse, showing a systematic approach to tracking object lifecycles throughout the API.
147-150:✅ Verification successful
Support for cancellation functionality.
The new
Cancellationproperty provides a clean way to represent check cancellation information using theCheckCancellationInfoclass. The property is correctly nullable since not all checks will be cancelled.
🏁 Script executed:
#!/bin/bash # Verify that CheckCancellationInfo class exists and has the expected properties # since it's referenced by the Cancellation property echo "Checking for CheckCancellationInfo class implementation:" cat src/Project/Checks/CheckCancellationInfo.csLength of output: 595
Cancellation Property Verified: The new
Cancellationproperty inCheckResponse.csis implemented correctly. It appropriately uses the nullableCheckCancellationInfotype for representing cancellation information. TheCheckCancellationInfoclass exists insrc/Project/Checks/CheckCancellationInfo.csand includes the required propertiesCancelledByUserandReason, confirming the proper support for cancellation functionality. No additional changes are needed.src/Tests/BankAccountsTests.cs (3)
34-40: Consolidating the if-else blocks
No functional issues. The single-line block usage aligns with the rest of the method’s style and does not affect logic.
76-94: Conditional block style
Logic remains correct. The updated formatting is consistent with surrounding code and is acceptable.
323-325:await foreachusage
The usage is valid and leverages asynchronous iteration effectively. No concerns here.src/Tests/ChecksTests.cs (2)
341-402:DeleteCheck_Successfulfunctionality
The test properly verifies check cancellation, including the cancellation info. No issues found.
404-465:GetCheck_AfterDelete_Successfulpost-cancellation retrieval
The test checks that the check is canceled and returns correct cancellation details. Implementation appears solid.src/Tests/ApiApprovalTests.PublicApi.approved.txt (9)
80-87: NewCheckCancellationInfoclass
The class cleanly encapsulates cancellation details. The properties seem appropriate for modeling cancellation data.
95-96: AddingCancellationandCreatedAt
Including the cancellation property and creation timestamp inCheckResponseenhances traceability. This is a sensible addition.
99-99: AddedEnvelopeproperty
Allowing separate envelope types raises clarity around mailing parameters. Looks good.
116-116: IntroducedPageCount
Marking page count as nullable is prudent if some checks might not track pages. No concerns.
118-118: NewSizeproperty
Indicating the check size is valuable. Consider enumerating known sizes if the domain requires standardization.
121-121: AddedUpdatedAt
Recording last update timestamps benefits auditing. No issues noted.
185-185: NewCountryproperty onContactBaseResponse
Captures granular location data effectively. No concerns.
204-204:CreatedAtinContactResponse
Adding creation timestamps to contacts ensures consistent metadata across entities. Looks good.
208-208:UpdatedAtinContactResponse
Storing update timestamps further aligns with typical auditing needs. Approved.
Summary by CodeRabbit