fix: correctly select properties of primitives #1279
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we have another place to store these tests?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The tested aspects are the field selection + exists functionality.
I don't feel like they are needed though, everything is covered in some way already.
fedeci
changed the title
| // wildcard position does not exist | ||
| return []; | ||
| } | ||
| // value is a primitive, there are still still paths to traverse that will be likely undefined, we return the entire path |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fun fact: you could theoretically go forever now (not for any good reason though), e.g. foo.toFixed.name.toString.length.toFixed... you just have to keep diving deeper into the prototype!
| // value is a primitive, there are still still paths to traverse that will be likely undefined, we return the entire path | |
| // value is a primitive, paths being traversed from here might be in their prototype, return the entire path |
| @@ -113,14 +115,19 @@ describe('selectFields()', () => { | |||
| const req = { | |||
| query: { foo: ['bar', 'baz'] }, | |||
| }; | |||
| const instances = selectFields(req, ['foo[1]'], ['query']); | |||
| const instances = selectFields(req, ['foo[1]', 'foo[2]'], ['query']); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OOC, does this cover anything non-obvious, or is just for thoroughness?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The tested aspects are the field selection + exists functionality.
I don't feel like they are needed though, everything is covered in some way already.
Description
Fixes #1245
It is correct to assume that primitives will not have properties in a request.
Despite that express-validator should provide the correct result, so if a user wants to validate a non existent property we should treat that as undefined.
Eventually in the future we may also update
FieldInstanceto look something like this:To-do list