You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Our Team Lead proposed exciting things when we tried to cover our API endpoint (.NET language) with a contract test, which required binary content in the request body. But, as Matt Fellows mentioned, we cannot interpret new ArrayBuffer(0) in something at JSON.
So, my question is - can we allow engineers to use new ArrayBuffer(0) in withRequest.body, but with interpretation to something like empty JavaScript object ( {} ) or something "magic" actions. In any case, this allowed us to write more honest contract tests, with explicit marks, that we expected to use in the request body - new ArrayBuffer(0) and can verify that in the generated pact specification.
Our Team Lead proposed exciting things when we tried to cover our API endpoint (.NET language) with a contract test, which required binary content in the request body. But, as Matt Fellows mentioned, we cannot interpret
new ArrayBuffer(0)
in something at JSON.So, my question is - can we allow engineers to use
new ArrayBuffer(0)
in withRequest.body, but with interpretation to something like empty JavaScript object ( {} ) or something "magic" actions. In any case, this allowed us to write more honest contract tests, with explicit marks, that we expected to use in the request body -new ArrayBuffer(0)
and can verify that in the generated pact specification.https://pact.canny.io/admin/board/feature-requests/p/allow-using-new-arraybuffer0-in-withrequestbody-to-be-honest-in-the-contract-tes
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: