Fix getNumberOfParameters utility function #2473
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
ensure getNumberOfArguments returns the correct number of arguments for functions with body that use parenthesis.
create additional tests to ensure the arguments count is correct for all types of functions with and without body
add test for unsupported case for documentation's sake.
|
lgtm |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
PR Checklist
Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:
PR Type
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
What is the current behavior?
The
getNumberOfArgumentsutility function returned an incorrect number when the function's body contained something inside the parenthesis.Issue Number: #2452
What is the new behavior?
The
getNumberOfArgumentsfunction now ignores the function's body.Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
Other information
I tested locally if this change actually fixed the problem of Durable Providers not working for GraphQL resolvers. However, I can't create an automated test for the repo here because it still relies on NestJS Version 8, so we don't have the
durableattribute as a Scope option.