Support Promises #5
Conversation
- updated package.json and readme to reflect that
- Test fails
- added returns to all resources for this to work
|
Huh, the tests pass, but the command to prettify it for travis is failing for some reason. I'll see if I can get that to work. |
- Follows style of other code - Plus it was making the parser upset for the tests
cgpuglie
requested review from
dmikalova and
dhowellbc
and removed request for
corasaurus-hex and
jgreer
|
|
||
| //request doesn't think 4xx is an error - we want an error for any non-2xx status codes | ||
| //we also we want this to be a real error object... | ||
| if (!err && (response.statusCode < 200 || response.statusCode > 206)){ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why not check for > 299 rather than > 206 to cover all 2xx?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's from the original function, so that one's on me, not @cgpuglie. It's been a while, but if I recall correctly this was something I saw in another SDK that took a similar approach to non-success code handling when using Request. I personally don't see any issue with just making the logic > 299, but to be fair 206 is the last "official" 2xx status code. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
| .get('/api/v2/account').times(3) | ||
| .reply(200, scopes.accounts.details) | ||
| .post('/api/v90/jobs') | ||
| .post('/api/v90/jobs').times(2) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's a test to ensure the 404 error handling returns an error object.
|
Looks good, just had 2 miscellaneous questions. |
|
|
||
| //request doesn't think 4xx is an error - we want an error for any non-2xx status codes | ||
| //we also we want this to be a real error object... | ||
| if (!err && (response.statusCode < 200 || response.statusCode > 206)){ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's from the original function, so that one's on me, not @cgpuglie. It's been a while, but if I recall correctly this was something I saw in another SDK that took a similar approach to non-success code handling when using Request. I personally don't see any issue with just making the logic > 299, but to be fair 206 is the last "official" 2xx status code. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
| .get('/api/v2/account').times(3) | ||
| .reply(200, scopes.accounts.details) | ||
| .post('/api/v90/jobs') | ||
| .post('/api/v90/jobs').times(2) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's a test to ensure the 404 error handling returns an error object.
| { | ||
| "name": "zencoder", | ||
| "version": "1.1.0", | ||
| "version": "2.0.1", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For what it's worth, this feels like it could technically be a minor bump if you wanted to. As far as I can tell no current functionality is broken (👍 ), so it shouldn't break anything for folks that are pinned to 1.x.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I went with major since it will no longer work with node 0.1.0, which was the original version requirement. Wanted to use native promises which require 6.4 or above.
I'm open to doing a minor if you'd prefer it though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That reasoning makes total sense to me 👍
Resolve #3
Added promise support and associated tests and documentation.