Add ability to pass extra options on each request - #12

Merged
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options
Apr 13, 2018
Merged

Add ability to pass extra options on each request#12
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options

Conversation

@pgom

@pgompgom commented Mar 19, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

This PR updates the request client making it to possible to pass additional options on each request

Related issues

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from 36be370 to fe8ad94CompareMarch 19, 2018 16:09
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {
const { method = 'get' } = options;
const requestOptions = {
...options,

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you destructuring the options object before the declaration of the other properties to prevent anyone from overriding those specific properties?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes!

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Very well. 👍

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
.then(() => {
expect(sdk.client.request).toBeCalledWith(
'https://api.uphold.com/v0/foo',
'get',

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did we removed the get assert?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The request method is not an argument anymore. It is now provided by the options object.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So, we need to create new tests to cover this scenario.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added on a different file.

@pgom
pgom requested a review from d-moreiraMarch 22, 2018 18:06
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 2 times, most recently from 7375b76 to a08e949CompareMarch 23, 2018 16:44
Comment threadsrc/browser/services/fetch-client.js Outdated
export default class FetchClient extends Client {
request(url, method = 'get', body, headers = {}) {
const options = {
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {

@SandroMachadoSandroMachadoApr 5, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did you removed the method and moved it to the options? Shouldn't the option only be an extra parameter to override all the other parameters?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The method is passed to sdk as an option and then we chose to separate it into a different variable. This way and to avoid increase the argument size on this method, I opt to remove it and start using the one on the options object

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 4 times, most recently from c4f313d to dc423acCompareApril 6, 2018 13:28
fetchMock.mock('foo', {});

return client.request('foo', 'post', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })
return client.request('foo', 'get', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need this change?

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
undefined,
{ authorization: 'foo' }
{ authorization: 'foo' },
{ headers: { authorization: 'foo' } }

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

According to the test name, this shouldn't be added, right?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The test name was wrong and confusing. Updated.

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from dc423ac to a8a2b8aCompareApril 6, 2018 14:30
@pgom

pgom commented Apr 9, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@SandroMachado updated

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from a8a2b8a to b04e9eaCompareApril 10, 2018 11:17
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from b04e9ea to 6c08470CompareApril 13, 2018 17:44
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado merged commit c1f3623 into masterApr 13, 2018
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado deleted the enhancement/request-options branch April 13, 2018 17:54
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@pgom@SandroMachado@hitmanmcc
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all
 blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Skip to content

Add ability to pass extra options on each request - #12

Merged
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options
Apr 13, 2018
Merged

Add ability to pass extra options on each request#12
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options

Conversation

@pgom

@pgompgom commented Mar 19, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

This PR updates the request client making it to possible to pass additional options on each request

Related issues

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from 36be370 to fe8ad94CompareMarch 19, 2018 16:09
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {
const { method = 'get' } = options;
const requestOptions = {
...options,

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you destructuring the options object before the declaration of the other properties to prevent anyone from overriding those specific properties?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes!

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Very well. 👍

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
.then(() => {
expect(sdk.client.request).toBeCalledWith(
'https://api.uphold.com/v0/foo',
'get',

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did we removed the get assert?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The request method is not an argument anymore. It is now provided by the options object.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So, we need to create new tests to cover this scenario.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added on a different file.

@pgom
pgom requested a review from d-moreiraMarch 22, 2018 18:06
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 2 times, most recently from 7375b76 to a08e949CompareMarch 23, 2018 16:44
Comment threadsrc/browser/services/fetch-client.js Outdated
export default class FetchClient extends Client {
request(url, method = 'get', body, headers = {}) {
const options = {
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {

@SandroMachadoSandroMachadoApr 5, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did you removed the method and moved it to the options? Shouldn't the option only be an extra parameter to override all the other parameters?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The method is passed to sdk as an option and then we chose to separate it into a different variable. This way and to avoid increase the argument size on this method, I opt to remove it and start using the one on the options object

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 4 times, most recently from c4f313d to dc423acCompareApril 6, 2018 13:28
fetchMock.mock('foo', {});

return client.request('foo', 'post', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })
return client.request('foo', 'get', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need this change?

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
undefined,
{ authorization: 'foo' }
{ authorization: 'foo' },
{ headers: { authorization: 'foo' } }

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

According to the test name, this shouldn't be added, right?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The test name was wrong and confusing. Updated.

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from dc423ac to a8a2b8aCompareApril 6, 2018 14:30
@pgom

pgom commented Apr 9, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@SandroMachado updated

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from a8a2b8a to b04e9eaCompareApril 10, 2018 11:17
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from b04e9ea to 6c08470CompareApril 13, 2018 17:44
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado merged commit c1f3623 into masterApr 13, 2018
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado deleted the enhancement/request-options branch April 13, 2018 17:54
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@pgom@SandroMachado@hitmanmcc
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Force GitHub README to respect dark mode (function() { var style = document.createElement('style'); style.textContent = ' .markdown-body { color-scheme: dark light; } .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; } .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; } .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; } .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; } .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; } .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; } '; document.head.appendChild(style); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Add ability to pass extra options on each request - #12

Merged
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options
Apr 13, 2018
Merged

Add ability to pass extra options on each request#12
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options

Conversation

@pgom

@pgompgom commented Mar 19, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

This PR updates the request client making it to possible to pass additional options on each request

Related issues

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from 36be370 to fe8ad94CompareMarch 19, 2018 16:09
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {
const { method = 'get' } = options;
const requestOptions = {
...options,

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you destructuring the options object before the declaration of the other properties to prevent anyone from overriding those specific properties?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes!

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Very well. 👍

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
.then(() => {
expect(sdk.client.request).toBeCalledWith(
'https://api.uphold.com/v0/foo',
'get',

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did we removed the get assert?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The request method is not an argument anymore. It is now provided by the options object.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So, we need to create new tests to cover this scenario.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added on a different file.

@pgom
pgom requested a review from d-moreiraMarch 22, 2018 18:06
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 2 times, most recently from 7375b76 to a08e949CompareMarch 23, 2018 16:44
Comment threadsrc/browser/services/fetch-client.js Outdated
export default class FetchClient extends Client {
request(url, method = 'get', body, headers = {}) {
const options = {
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {

@SandroMachadoSandroMachadoApr 5, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did you removed the method and moved it to the options? Shouldn't the option only be an extra parameter to override all the other parameters?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The method is passed to sdk as an option and then we chose to separate it into a different variable. This way and to avoid increase the argument size on this method, I opt to remove it and start using the one on the options object

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 4 times, most recently from c4f313d to dc423acCompareApril 6, 2018 13:28
fetchMock.mock('foo', {});

return client.request('foo', 'post', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })
return client.request('foo', 'get', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need this change?

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
undefined,
{ authorization: 'foo' }
{ authorization: 'foo' },
{ headers: { authorization: 'foo' } }

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

According to the test name, this shouldn't be added, right?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The test name was wrong and confusing. Updated.

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from dc423ac to a8a2b8aCompareApril 6, 2018 14:30
@pgom

pgom commented Apr 9, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@SandroMachado updated

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from a8a2b8a to b04e9eaCompareApril 10, 2018 11:17
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from b04e9ea to 6c08470CompareApril 13, 2018 17:44
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado merged commit c1f3623 into masterApr 13, 2018
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado deleted the enhancement/request-options branch April 13, 2018 17:54
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@pgom@SandroMachado@hitmanmcc
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer (function() { var ref = document.referrer; var terms = []; if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) { var url = new URL(ref); var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p'); if (q) { terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; }); } } if (terms.length === 0) return; var style = document.createElement('style'); style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }'; document.head.appendChild(style); function highlight(node) { if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node var text = node.textContent; var found = false; terms.forEach(function(term) { var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi'); if (regex.test(text)) { found = true; var frag = document.createDocumentFragment(); var parts = text.split(regex); parts.forEach(function(part, i) { if (i % 2 === 0) { frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part)); } else { var span = document.createElement('span'); span.className = 'userscript-highlight'; span.textContent = part; frag.appendChild(span); } }); node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node); } }); } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT']; if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) { Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight); } } } highlight(document.body); // Re-highlight on dynamic content var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) { mutations.forEach(function(m) { m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) { if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node); }); }); }); observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true }); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Add ability to pass extra options on each request - #12

Merged
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options
Apr 13, 2018
Merged

Add ability to pass extra options on each request#12
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options

Conversation

@pgom

@pgompgom commented Mar 19, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

This PR updates the request client making it to possible to pass additional options on each request

Related issues

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from 36be370 to fe8ad94CompareMarch 19, 2018 16:09
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {
const { method = 'get' } = options;
const requestOptions = {
...options,

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you destructuring the options object before the declaration of the other properties to prevent anyone from overriding those specific properties?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes!

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Very well. 👍

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
.then(() => {
expect(sdk.client.request).toBeCalledWith(
'https://api.uphold.com/v0/foo',
'get',

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did we removed the get assert?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The request method is not an argument anymore. It is now provided by the options object.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So, we need to create new tests to cover this scenario.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added on a different file.

@pgom
pgom requested a review from d-moreiraMarch 22, 2018 18:06
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 2 times, most recently from 7375b76 to a08e949CompareMarch 23, 2018 16:44
Comment threadsrc/browser/services/fetch-client.js Outdated
export default class FetchClient extends Client {
request(url, method = 'get', body, headers = {}) {
const options = {
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {

@SandroMachadoSandroMachadoApr 5, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did you removed the method and moved it to the options? Shouldn't the option only be an extra parameter to override all the other parameters?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The method is passed to sdk as an option and then we chose to separate it into a different variable. This way and to avoid increase the argument size on this method, I opt to remove it and start using the one on the options object

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 4 times, most recently from c4f313d to dc423acCompareApril 6, 2018 13:28
fetchMock.mock('foo', {});

return client.request('foo', 'post', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })
return client.request('foo', 'get', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need this change?

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
undefined,
{ authorization: 'foo' }
{ authorization: 'foo' },
{ headers: { authorization: 'foo' } }

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

According to the test name, this shouldn't be added, right?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The test name was wrong and confusing. Updated.

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from dc423ac to a8a2b8aCompareApril 6, 2018 14:30
@pgom

pgom commented Apr 9, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@SandroMachado updated

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from a8a2b8a to b04e9eaCompareApril 10, 2018 11:17
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from b04e9ea to 6c08470CompareApril 13, 2018 17:44
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado merged commit c1f3623 into masterApr 13, 2018
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado deleted the enhancement/request-options branch April 13, 2018 17:54
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@pgom@SandroMachado@hitmanmcc
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page (function() { var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content', 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid', 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign']; function cleanUrl(url) { try { var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin); var changed = false; trackingParams.forEach(function(p) { if (u.searchParams.has(p)) { u.searchParams.delete(p); changed = true; } }); return changed ? u.toString() : url; } catch (e) { return url; } } function cleanLinks() { document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) { var clean = cleanUrl(a.href); if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean; }); } cleanLinks(); var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) { mutations.forEach(function(m) { m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) { if (node.nodeType === 1) { if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks(); node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) { var clean = cleanUrl(a.href); if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean; }); } }); }); }); observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true }); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "youtube.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Skip to content

Add ability to pass extra options on each request - #12

Merged
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options
Apr 13, 2018
Merged

Add ability to pass extra options on each request#12
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options

Conversation

@pgom

@pgompgom commented Mar 19, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

This PR updates the request client making it to possible to pass additional options on each request

Related issues

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from 36be370 to fe8ad94CompareMarch 19, 2018 16:09
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {
const { method = 'get' } = options;
const requestOptions = {
...options,

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you destructuring the options object before the declaration of the other properties to prevent anyone from overriding those specific properties?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes!

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Very well. 👍

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
.then(() => {
expect(sdk.client.request).toBeCalledWith(
'https://api.uphold.com/v0/foo',
'get',

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did we removed the get assert?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The request method is not an argument anymore. It is now provided by the options object.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So, we need to create new tests to cover this scenario.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added on a different file.

@pgom
pgom requested a review from d-moreiraMarch 22, 2018 18:06
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 2 times, most recently from 7375b76 to a08e949CompareMarch 23, 2018 16:44
Comment threadsrc/browser/services/fetch-client.js Outdated
export default class FetchClient extends Client {
request(url, method = 'get', body, headers = {}) {
const options = {
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {

@SandroMachadoSandroMachadoApr 5, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did you removed the method and moved it to the options? Shouldn't the option only be an extra parameter to override all the other parameters?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The method is passed to sdk as an option and then we chose to separate it into a different variable. This way and to avoid increase the argument size on this method, I opt to remove it and start using the one on the options object

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 4 times, most recently from c4f313d to dc423acCompareApril 6, 2018 13:28
fetchMock.mock('foo', {});

return client.request('foo', 'post', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })
return client.request('foo', 'get', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need this change?

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
undefined,
{ authorization: 'foo' }
{ authorization: 'foo' },
{ headers: { authorization: 'foo' } }

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

According to the test name, this shouldn't be added, right?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The test name was wrong and confusing. Updated.

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from dc423ac to a8a2b8aCompareApril 6, 2018 14:30
@pgom

pgom commented Apr 9, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@SandroMachado updated

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from a8a2b8a to b04e9eaCompareApril 10, 2018 11:17
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from b04e9ea to 6c08470CompareApril 13, 2018 17:44
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado merged commit c1f3623 into masterApr 13, 2018
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado deleted the enhancement/request-options branch April 13, 2018 17:54
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@pgom@SandroMachado@hitmanmcc
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube (function() { function tryTheater() { var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]'); if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) { btn.click(); } } // Try immediately tryTheater(); // Try after navigation (SPA) var lastUrl = location.href; setInterval(function() { if (location.href !== lastUrl) { lastUrl = location.href; setTimeout(tryTheater, 500); } }, 1000); // Also try on player load var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater); observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true }); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Add ability to pass extra options on each request - #12

Merged
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options
Apr 13, 2018
Merged

Add ability to pass extra options on each request#12
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options

Conversation

@pgom

@pgompgom commented Mar 19, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

This PR updates the request client making it to possible to pass additional options on each request

Related issues

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from 36be370 to fe8ad94CompareMarch 19, 2018 16:09
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {
const { method = 'get' } = options;
const requestOptions = {
...options,

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you destructuring the options object before the declaration of the other properties to prevent anyone from overriding those specific properties?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes!

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Very well. 👍

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
.then(() => {
expect(sdk.client.request).toBeCalledWith(
'https://api.uphold.com/v0/foo',
'get',

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did we removed the get assert?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The request method is not an argument anymore. It is now provided by the options object.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So, we need to create new tests to cover this scenario.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added on a different file.

@pgom
pgom requested a review from d-moreiraMarch 22, 2018 18:06
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 2 times, most recently from 7375b76 to a08e949CompareMarch 23, 2018 16:44
Comment threadsrc/browser/services/fetch-client.js Outdated
export default class FetchClient extends Client {
request(url, method = 'get', body, headers = {}) {
const options = {
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {

@SandroMachadoSandroMachadoApr 5, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did you removed the method and moved it to the options? Shouldn't the option only be an extra parameter to override all the other parameters?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The method is passed to sdk as an option and then we chose to separate it into a different variable. This way and to avoid increase the argument size on this method, I opt to remove it and start using the one on the options object

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 4 times, most recently from c4f313d to dc423acCompareApril 6, 2018 13:28
fetchMock.mock('foo', {});

return client.request('foo', 'post', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })
return client.request('foo', 'get', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need this change?

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
undefined,
{ authorization: 'foo' }
{ authorization: 'foo' },
{ headers: { authorization: 'foo' } }

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

According to the test name, this shouldn't be added, right?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The test name was wrong and confusing. Updated.

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from dc423ac to a8a2b8aCompareApril 6, 2018 14:30
@pgom

pgom commented Apr 9, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@SandroMachado updated

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from a8a2b8a to b04e9eaCompareApril 10, 2018 11:17
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from b04e9ea to 6c08470CompareApril 13, 2018 17:44
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado merged commit c1f3623 into masterApr 13, 2018
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado deleted the enhancement/request-options branch April 13, 2018 17:54
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@pgom@SandroMachado@hitmanmcc
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content (function() { function unstick() { document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) { if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') { el.style.position = 'static'; el.style.top = 'auto'; el.style.zIndex = 'auto'; } }); } unstick(); var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick); observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] }); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Add ability to pass extra options on each request - #12

Merged
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options
Apr 13, 2018
Merged

Add ability to pass extra options on each request#12
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options

Conversation

@pgom

@pgompgom commented Mar 19, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

This PR updates the request client making it to possible to pass additional options on each request

Related issues

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from 36be370 to fe8ad94CompareMarch 19, 2018 16:09
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {
const { method = 'get' } = options;
const requestOptions = {
...options,

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you destructuring the options object before the declaration of the other properties to prevent anyone from overriding those specific properties?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes!

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Very well. 👍

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
.then(() => {
expect(sdk.client.request).toBeCalledWith(
'https://api.uphold.com/v0/foo',
'get',

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did we removed the get assert?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The request method is not an argument anymore. It is now provided by the options object.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So, we need to create new tests to cover this scenario.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added on a different file.

@pgom
pgom requested a review from d-moreiraMarch 22, 2018 18:06
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 2 times, most recently from 7375b76 to a08e949CompareMarch 23, 2018 16:44
Comment threadsrc/browser/services/fetch-client.js Outdated
export default class FetchClient extends Client {
request(url, method = 'get', body, headers = {}) {
const options = {
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {

@SandroMachadoSandroMachadoApr 5, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did you removed the method and moved it to the options? Shouldn't the option only be an extra parameter to override all the other parameters?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The method is passed to sdk as an option and then we chose to separate it into a different variable. This way and to avoid increase the argument size on this method, I opt to remove it and start using the one on the options object

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 4 times, most recently from c4f313d to dc423acCompareApril 6, 2018 13:28
fetchMock.mock('foo', {});

return client.request('foo', 'post', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })
return client.request('foo', 'get', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need this change?

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
undefined,
{ authorization: 'foo' }
{ authorization: 'foo' },
{ headers: { authorization: 'foo' } }

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

According to the test name, this shouldn't be added, right?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The test name was wrong and confusing. Updated.

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from dc423ac to a8a2b8aCompareApril 6, 2018 14:30
@pgom

pgom commented Apr 9, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@SandroMachado updated

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from a8a2b8a to b04e9eaCompareApril 10, 2018 11:17
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from b04e9ea to 6c08470CompareApril 13, 2018 17:44
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado merged commit c1f3623 into masterApr 13, 2018
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado deleted the enhancement/request-options branch April 13, 2018 17:54
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@pgom@SandroMachado@hitmanmcc
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Universal Dark Mode - works on any site (function() { var enabled = true; function applyDarkMode() { if (!enabled) return; // Create style element if it doesn't exist var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style'); if (!style) { style = document.createElement('style'); style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style'; document.head.appendChild(style); } // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video style.textContent = ' /* Invert everything except media */ html { filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important; background: #1a1a2e !important; } /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */ img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*="background-image"] { filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important; } /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */ .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *, [data-theme="light"], [data-theme="light"], .ace_editor, .ace_editor *, .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *, .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *, .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *, .highlight, .highlight *, pre code, pre code * { filter: none !important; } /* Fix common UI elements */ .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover { filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important; background: #2d2d44 !important; border-color: #444 !important; } /* Scrollbars */ ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; } ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; } ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; } /* Selection */ ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; } ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; } '; } function removeDarkMode() { var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style'); if (style) style.remove(); } // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) { if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') { e.preventDefault(); enabled = !enabled; if (enabled) { applyDarkMode(); console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled'); } else { removeDarkMode(); console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled'); } } }); // Apply on load applyDarkMode(); // Re-apply on dynamic content var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) { if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) { applyDarkMode(); } }); observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true }); console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle'); })(); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); } })(); })();
Skip to content

Add ability to pass extra options on each request - #12

Merged
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options
Apr 13, 2018
Merged

Add ability to pass extra options on each request#12
SandroMachado merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
enhancement/request-options

Conversation

@pgom

@pgompgom commented Mar 19, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

This PR updates the request client making it to possible to pass additional options on each request

Related issues

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from 36be370 to fe8ad94CompareMarch 19, 2018 16:09
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {
const { method = 'get' } = options;
const requestOptions = {
...options,

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are you destructuring the options object before the declaration of the other properties to prevent anyone from overriding those specific properties?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes!

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Very well. 👍

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
.then(() => {
expect(sdk.client.request).toBeCalledWith(
'https://api.uphold.com/v0/foo',
'get',

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did we removed the get assert?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The request method is not an argument anymore. It is now provided by the options object.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So, we need to create new tests to cover this scenario.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added on a different file.

@pgom
pgom requested a review from d-moreiraMarch 22, 2018 18:06
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 2 times, most recently from 7375b76 to a08e949CompareMarch 23, 2018 16:44
Comment threadsrc/browser/services/fetch-client.js Outdated
export default class FetchClient extends Client {
request(url, method = 'get', body, headers = {}) {
const options = {
request(url, body, headers = {}, options = {}) {

@SandroMachadoSandroMachadoApr 5, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why did you removed the method and moved it to the options? Shouldn't the option only be an extra parameter to override all the other parameters?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The method is passed to sdk as an option and then we chose to separate it into a different variable. This way and to avoid increase the argument size on this method, I opt to remove it and start using the one on the options object

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch 4 times, most recently from c4f313d to dc423acCompareApril 6, 2018 13:28
fetchMock.mock('foo', {});

return client.request('foo', 'post', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })
return client.request('foo', 'get', 'bar', { 'Biz-Baz': 'buz' })

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need this change?

Comment threadtest/core/sdk.spec.js
undefined,
{ authorization: 'foo' }
{ authorization: 'foo' },
{ headers: { authorization: 'foo' } }

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

According to the test name, this shouldn't be added, right?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The test name was wrong and confusing. Updated.

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from dc423ac to a8a2b8aCompareApril 6, 2018 14:30
@pgom

pgom commented Apr 9, 2018

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@SandroMachado updated

@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from a8a2b8a to b04e9eaCompareApril 10, 2018 11:17
@pgom
pgomforce-pushed the enhancement/request-options branch from b04e9ea to 6c08470CompareApril 13, 2018 17:44
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado merged commit c1f3623 into masterApr 13, 2018
@SandroMachado
SandroMachado deleted the enhancement/request-options branch April 13, 2018 17:54
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@pgom@SandroMachado@hitmanmcc