chore(utils): Update internal service update input validation #8265
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
6 Skipped Deployments
|
|
|
I am also trying to improve the base API in a separate pr @olivermrbl, though, I ll have to ts expect error in many services because they override the base method with a different API which is not supposed to happen, but I can ignore them for now until the full modules API is settled and in any case those override normalize their input to be consumed by the base methods |
| @@ -252,12 +252,22 @@ export function MedusaInternalService< | |||
| input: any | any[] | SelectorAndData | SelectorAndData[], | |||
| @MedusaContext() sharedContext: Context = {} | |||
| ): Promise<InferEntityType<TEntity> | InferEntityType<TEntity>[]> { | |||
| if (!isDefined(input) || (Array.isArray(input) && input.length === 0)) { | |||
| if ( | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we use isPresent here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes you are right 👍 much better, I ll add that in
| @@ -252,12 +252,22 @@ export function MedusaInternalService< | |||
| input: any | any[] | SelectorAndData | SelectorAndData[], | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thought: @shahednasser, do we have a reference for the internal module services? If not, would it make sense to have such that we can provide a link in the error message?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not a reference, but we have examples here: https://docs.medusajs.com/v2/advanced-development/modules/service-factory#generated-methods
We can generate a reference if we find it necessary, but the reason I didn't is I imagine the typings being confusing. We can alternatively have a document that provides more advanced / realistic examples
|
@olivermrbl I will stop this pr for now as it is still documented. But it require a much broader work on aligning the different API's the modules are defining VS what the internal service is provided. There is too much discrepancies for now and I d like to finalise my other tasks. wdyt? thought, I ll keep this pr open for reference in case I get back to this one later |
Yeah, let's do that for now. We can pick it up as part of our polishing phase. |
|
This PR is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 5 days. |
What
Add more validation to the update input arguments to catch wrong usage
FIXES TRI-64