Add missing examples in headless engine protocol actions

[pmareke]

Fixes #1102

Done:

• ActionScreenshot
• ActionTimeInput
• ActionSelectInput
• ActionFilesInput
• ActionWaitLoad
• ActionGetResource
• ActionExtract
• ActionSetMethod
• ActionAddHeader
• ActionDeleteHeader
• ActionSetBody
• ActionKeyboard
• ActionSleep
• ActionWaitEvent (I'm not able to figure out why the test crashes)
• ActionDebug (I don't how to test it because this action sets the internal trace to true but it's private)

Signed-off-by: pedro.lopez.mareque@gmail.com

[forgedhallpass]

Please

• solve the linter issue
• Optional: conflict that was introduced by my refactor.
• Optional: you could try to follow the same approach to remove duplicated code, otherwise I will do it myself later on.

[pmareke]

Please

• solve the linter issue
• Optional: conflict that was introduced by my refactor.
• Optional: you could try to follow the same approach to remove duplicated code, otherwise I will do it myself later on.

Sure, I'll give it a try!

[pmareke]

• Optional: you could try to follow the same approach to remove duplicated code, otherwise I will do it myself later on.

Regarding this one I'm not quite sure what do you mean. I can see yo created a privaste helper method to use in both t.Run(), is this what you want?

[forgedhallpass]

@pmareke I've extracted the common logic into a separate method so that I can re-use it instead of duplicating the code. The advantage is that this way the the test cases are easier to read and if later on, they'd require adjusting, they would only have to be modified in one place. But as I said, since it's test code, this is rather a challange then a requirement :-) The PR will be approved without it as well.

[pmareke]

@pmareke I've extracted the common logic into a separate method so that I can re-use it instead of duplicating the code. The advantage is that this way the the test cases are easier to read and if later on, they'd require adjusting, they would only have to be modified in one place. But as I said, since it's test code, this is rather a challange then a requirement :-) The PR will be approved without it as well.

Ou no no it's perfect, the only place where we have another t.Run() it's TestActionScript, I can aded there for sure.

[pmareke]

@forgedhallpass Refactored TestActionScript test

[forgedhallpass]

@pmareke good job with the tests and thank you for your contribution!

To see what I've meant with regards to the 3rd action point, please see: 4d14063

[pmareke]

@pmareke good job with the tests and thank you for your contribution!

To see what I've meant with regards to the 3rd action point, please see: 4d14063

Thanks so much and sorry for not understand what you said.

Take care!