Fix npe in state reference resolution utils #1118
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
lojzatran
approved these changes
Nov 27, 2023
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1118 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 97.33% 97.34% +0.01%
+ Complexity 2674 2671 -3
============================================
Files 229 229
Lines 8502 8487 -15
Branches 526 519 -7
============================================
- Hits 8275 8262 -13
+ Misses 141 140 -1
+ Partials 86 85 -1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
salander85
deleted the
DEVX-277_Fix-npe-in-state-reference-resolution-utils
branch
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
JIRA: https://commercetools.atlassian.net/browse/DEVX-277
Hints for Review
To avoid NPE thrown by StateDraftBuilder i've added a check for required fields and created empty draft in case of missing required (which will fail in sync() with proper error message because it'll be checked by BatchValidator).
This solution isn't discussed yet. Maybe you have other idea to handle this? Maybe the behavior before was already correct?