Attempt accessing only valid item properties

[ashmaroli]

Resolves #6939

[kenman345]

does this need tests with it?

[mattr-]

Looks like we need a test for what happens if something isn't an array, at least.

[ashmaroli]

@mattr- Since the time the latest update to where filter was merged in, I hv been trying to see if we can support getting a hash foo's sub-property via use of foo.bar in the where filter..
Will open a PR for that this Sunday and let it close this PR organically..

[mattr-]

I'm not ready to introduce the complexity for a foo.bar style sub-property query for the where filter right now this late in the release process. We can consider it for a future release. I'd rather see this PR ship first.

[mattr-]

Based on this test, the functionality feels too complicated to fix the bug. The most straightforward way I know to test this is to write something like:

should "not throw exception when an item doesn't have the property" do
  array = [{}, { "color" => nil }, { "color" => "" }, { "color" => "text" }, { "foo" => "bar" }]
  assert_equal [{ "color" => "text" }], @filter.where(hash, "color", "text")
end

Also, filtering on sub properties, as in #6939 (context.type), isn't valid syntax. This feels like we need a better reproduction case.

[ashmaroli]

Your test-case passes on master. The issue outlined in #6939 is actually due to #item_property encountering a nil element.

Modifying your test-case to the following (will fail on current master:

should "not throw exception when an item doesn't have the property" do
  array = [{}, { "color" => "text" }, { "foo" => "bar" }, nil]
  assert_equal [{ "color" => "text" }], @filter.where(array, "color", "text")
end

Another case that'll fail on master:

should "not throw exception when an item doesn't have the property" do
  array = [{}, { "color" => "text" }, [], { "foo" => "bar" }]
  assert_equal [{ "color" => "text" }], @filter.where(array, "color", "text")
end