Catalog search with zero count

[veloman-yunkan]

Fixes #684

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #686 (b8328a7) into master (7440652) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #686   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   60.79%   60.80%           
=======================================
  Files          54       54           
  Lines        3943     3944    +1     
  Branches     1993     1994    +1     
=======================================
+ Hits         2397     2398    +1     
  Misses       1545     1545           
  Partials        1        1           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/server/internalServer.cpp	82.60% <100.00%> (+0.03%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 7440652...b8328a7. Read the comment docs.

[kelson42]

@veloman-yunkan No sure about your opinion, but I would add a code comment explaining that this is temporary, because of #684 and that this should be removed in a near future.

[veloman-yunkan]

@veloman-yunkan No sure about your opinion, but I would add a code comment explaining that this is temporary, because of #684 and that this should be removed in a near future.

I don't see why this fix should be temporary. The change in the handling of count=0 by the /catalog/search endpoint was unintentional (just a by-product of some code refactoring in 07252a1 #492). I don't see any problem in reversing that change in behaviour.

[kelson42]

@veloman-yunkan OK, not sure this is the best approach, but considering that requesting 0 books ins anyway quite a non-sense, I won't argue about that. So, thx for that fix.

What about the differrence of behaviour between empty string and undefined? Is that on purpose? What are the rationals?

[veloman-yunkan]

What about the differrence of behaviour between empty string and undefined? Is that on purpose? What are the rationals?

@kelson42 The default value for count was set to 10 and that was on purpose. Handling of count= (empty) is unspecified and I don't think that it should be specified (just like we don't specify the handling of, for example, count=ten or count=half_of_all_books).