get or getIn on List using a key that is a string, object, or void 0 does not return correct notSetValue

[dashed]

const {List} = require('immutable');

const foo = List();

const NOT_SET = {};
console.log(foo.get('bar', NOT_SET) !== NOT_SET); // => true (expected false)
console.log(foo.getIn(['bar'], NOT_SET) !== NOT_SET); // => true (expected false)

// this regression breaks .hasIn()
console.log(foo.has('bar')); // => false
console.log(foo.hasIn(['bar'])); // => true (expected false)

[dashed]

Using immutable@3.7.3.

[leebyron]

Thank you for the report!

[dashed]

I tried other types of keys:

const {List} = require('immutable');

const foo = List();

[
    'bar',
    true,
    false,
    null,
    void 0,
    {},
    42,
    42.5
].forEach(function(key) {

    const NOT_SET = {};

    let ret = false;

    ret = (foo.get(key, NOT_SET) !== NOT_SET) || ret;
    ret = (foo.getIn([key], NOT_SET) !== NOT_SET) || ret;

    ret = foo.has(key) || ret;
    ret = foo.hasIn([key]) || ret;

    if(ret) {
        console.log('broken for key', key);
    }
});
// broken for key bar
// broken for key undefined
// broken for key {}

[leebyron]

Thanks for your investigation!

[mhagmajer]

+1

[mhagmajer]

Immutable.List([7]).getIn(0) // throws error whereas 7 was expected
Immutable.List([7]).getIn('0') // returns 7 as expected

[leebyron]

It looks like the second should probably also throw an error. getIn expects an Iterable collection of keys. Strings are Iterable but often not considered collections because that leads to confusion.

Would you please open a separate issue for this other issue?

[mhagmajer]

Thanks @leebyron, I realized that I was calling getIn incorrectly. I created a new issue at #940 for strings in getIn.