Error on invalid body #427
Conversation
|
Perhaps Hash should be supported? How should it be encoded though? JSON, XML? |
|
That was my original intent when I sat down to write this PR. I would want the Hash to be converted to what ever the For JSON, it's pretty straight forward, for XML it could get complicated (e.g. namespaces). I decided this was too much responsibility for WebMock to take on. Do you have a straightforward implementation in mind? |
|
Indeed, it may be too much for WebMock. Why do you allow |
|
There was a test that failed when I didn't :-) It looks like that's how you specify a chunked response in WebMock. |
|
Indeed, I forgot about it. WebMock really deserves proper documentation instead of one big readme ;) |
|
I can make a rough draft of some updated in-depth documentation. Did you have a specific framework (like Rspec's relish) in mind? |
|
I like the minimalistic way http://markevans.github.io/dragonfly/ is done, although I'm not sure what is used there. To be honest, anything will be better than current docs, so I'd be happy with any framework :) |
WebMock fixed argument handling of 'to_return'. Update td-client-ruby's spec to follow the change. The detail is here; bblimke/webmock#427
Why this PR? Right now, users might be confused as to why a hash cannot be accepted as a response body? See Issue bblimke#449 on Github as well as bblimke#427. This seems to have caused considerable consternation to API users - with some spending many frustrated hours searching for a solution. Perhaps it can be solved with a more helpful exception message? This PR hopes to remedy this apparent shortcoming. Perhaps I shall remedy it with an update to the documentation as well. I submit it with the utmost respect to the maintainers and community. Thank you for your efforts, and for reviewing. Ben
It's pretty common for me to try to give a
Hashto#to_return(body: ). This results in errors like:It would save debugging time if WebMock raised an error, instead of accepting the Hash. This PR implements that error.