[fix] Multi variable support in check values.

[legander]

FIX check value referencing multiple variables only resolving first variable.

HAR fragment / desired outcome / before PR result

// HAR fragment
"entries": [
  {
    "variables": [
      {
        "type": JSONPath,
        "name": "firstName",
        "expression": "$.first_name"
      },
      {
        "type": JSONPath,
        "name": "lastName",
        "expression": "$.last_name"
      }
    ],
  },
  {
    "checks": [
      {
        "type": JSONPathValue,
        "expression": "$.full_name",
        "condition": equals,
        "value": "${firstName} ${lastName}"
      }
    ],
  }
]
    
// Desired outcome
check(response, {
  [`\$.full_name equals ${vars["firstName"]} ${vars["lastName"]}`]: response =>
    jsonpath
      .query(response.json(), "$.full_name")
      .some(value => value === `${vars["firstName"]} ${vars["lastName"]}`),
});    

// Before PR
check(response, {
  [`\$.full_name equals ${vars["firstName"]} ${vars["lastName"]}`]: response =>
    jsonpath
      .query(response.json(), "$.full_name")
      .some(value => value === vars["firstName"]),
});

NOTE: Only multi variable usage generate TemplateLiteral while single variable usage still generates MemberExpression.

Multi: `${vars["a"]} ${vars["b"]}`
Single: vars["a"]

[allansson]

// Desired outcome
check(response, {
  [`\$.full_name equals ${vars["firstName"]} ${vars["lastName"]}`]: response =>
    jsonpath
      .query(response.json(), "$.full_name")
      .some(value => value === `${vars["firstName"]} ${vars["lastName"]}`),
});

Isn't it pretty weird that the name of the check would be e.g. $.full_name equals John Doe? I don't think that the name of the check should depend on what the API is returning because it would mean that two runs of the same test could produce different checks. In my mind the name should be something like $.full_name equals "<firstName> <lastName>"

[allansson]

Just a couple of questions. Nothing big.

[allansson]

Do we have a polyfill for the matchAll-function?

https://caniuse.com/?search=matchAll

[legander]

For node usage we're good (node 12). For cloud app usage, It looks like core-js covers that.

[allansson]

Great!

[mstoykov]

just FYI there is no more core-js in the cloud/k6, but k6 has support for matchAll from goja

[allansson]

@mstoykov The matchAll is run in node/browser when converting the har file to a script. So it doesn't run in k6.

[legander]

// Desired outcome
check(response, {
  [`\$.full_name equals ${vars["firstName"]} ${vars["lastName"]}`]: response =>
    jsonpath
      .query(response.json(), "$.full_name")
      .some(value => value === `${vars["firstName"]} ${vars["lastName"]}`),
});

Isn't it pretty weird that the name of the check would be e.g. $.full_name equals John Doe? I don't think that the name of the check should depend on what the API is returning because it would mean that two runs of the same test could produce different checks. In my mind the name should be something like $.full_name equals "<firstName> <lastName>"

Yes I agree with that. That behaviour is not introduced by this PR thought.. But I'll change it 👍

[allansson]

LGTM. You can merge when you feel like it.

[w1kman]

LGTM 🎉