✨ Add specific error for Show-Advice

[robdy]

PR Summary

Fixes #286.

Context

As discovered in #285 and then noted in #286, Show-Advice should be more specific while erroring. I added two specific checks (if Advice was found at all and if title and content is not empty), each of them throwing specific errors. Initially I thought about having separate errors for missing title and missing content, but I think this should be handled in tests, not in the cmdlet definition (correct me if you think opposite.
As #283 (tests for *-Advice) is not yet merged, I can open an issue to have it noted, that tests should be adjusted to verify that behavior. I can wait until it's merged and then modify the tests if that's more preferred.

Changes

• Add ObjectNotFound error for Show-Advice
• Add InvalidData error for Show-Advice

Checklist

• Pull Request has a meaningful title.
• Summarised changes.
• Pull Request is ready to merge & is not WIP.
• Added tests / only testable interactively.
  • Make sure you add a new test if old tests do not effectively test the code changed.
• Added documentation / opened issue to track adding documentation at a later date.

[vexx32]

@robdy hmmm.... probably best if we sort out & merge the tests first and then you can make necessary changes to the tests in this PR, just to be safe. 💖

[vexx32]

Thanks for taking care of this! 💖

Couple of minor bits and pieces I'd like to iron out, and then we'll have to get the tests merged and updated a bit here, then we're good to go! 😊

[vexx32]

@robdy are you still interested in working on this one? 🙂
If you need a hand with anything, just let me know!

(And if not / you're too busy, no worries, I can finish this specific issue up sometime this week and we can tackle something else later! 😊)

[robdy]

@vexx32 let me commit what I have today evening, I have this pretty much ready

[robdy]

Few comments to the recent changes. To generate incorrect files I had to adjust the existing tests. I tried to create new ones but it required loading them before. To avoid that, the test import data, modify it, perform tests and then restore the initial value.
As a result, I modified .json files so that its content is unchanged when backup is being restored.

[vexx32]

Okay! If it works, it works. 😊

I'm wondering whether we could possibly bypass that by Mocking Get-Content to just return the JSON string directly, for the purposes of that test? As long as you apply the Mock within the PSKoans module scope it should work... I think. (But that's me mainly guessing, so I might be overlooking something!)

Otherwise this all looks good! Thank you so much! 💖

[robdy]

Perhaps we can open an issue for that and I can check if I'm able to rewrite this later as you described - what do you think?

[vexx32]

Yeah, we can roll with that. 👍