added examples in docblocks of new network test steps in Playwright helper #3758
Conversation
|
@kobenguyent please merge if you think it is good |
lib/helper/Playwright.js
Outdated
| * Examples: | ||
| * | ||
| * ```js | ||
| * await I.mockTraffic('/api/users/1', '{ id: 1, name: 'John Doe' }'); |
lib/helper/Playwright.js
Outdated
| * Examples: | ||
| * | ||
| * ```js | ||
| * await I.blockTraffic('http://example.com/css/style.css'); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do we always need await?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No. We don't need actually.
Good catch.
I made hands-on tests and they all worked just fine without await.
-> I updated the examples in docblock. I didn't yet change it in the functional code to make the methods sync, that don't need to be async. A
ctually almost all new steps are sync methods except await I.seeTraffic
seeTraffic is async because we decided to have waiting mechanism in there for up to 10 seconds (default value).
lib/helper/Playwright.js
Outdated
| * | ||
| * ```js | ||
| * await I.getTrafficUrl('https://api.example.com/session'); | ||
| * await I.getTrafficUrl(/session.*start/); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I just thought, maybe we should use grab prefix?
juist to keep one standard
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree with DavertMilk.
I also would prefer "grabTrafficUrl".
|
@kobenguyent please merge it |
…-more-custom-steps-docs
kobenguyent
merged commit f337b78
into
codeceptjs:feat-playwright-more-custom-steps
Motivation/Description of the PR
asyncfromdontSeeTraffic, because there is no need for it. The evaluating code inside runs synchronously.getTrafficUrlfail hard when recording of traffic has not yet started. I think this is helpful for the test automation engineer. I cannot imagine there is usecase where this new behavior is unwanted.Applicable helpers:
Type of change
Checklist:
npm run docs)npm run lint)npm test)