Add Matcher Support for Headers #72
Conversation
driverpt
force-pushed
the
header-matchers
branch
from
c83ae45
to
823031f
Compare
driverpt
force-pushed
the
header-matchers
branch
from
823031f
to
d46654d
Compare
| throw new AssertionError("Missing header " + headerMatcher.getKey()); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| headerMatcher.getValue() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a bit messy. Can someone take a look at this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
have you run into some concurrent issues that we need a ConcurrentHashMap and a lock object?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not at the moment. But I suspect we'll run into some issues when using JUnit's 5 Parallelized Tests.
I can remove it if you think it's best.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, please. if we face these issue we'll have to find out some other solutions how to handle concurrency.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, i was on vacation. Just updated
| ResponseDefinitionBuilder headers(Map<String, String> additionalHeaders); | ||
| default ResponseDefinitionBuilder headers(Map<String, String> additionalHeaders) { | ||
| additionalHeaders | ||
| .forEach((k, v) -> header(k, Matchers.equalToIgnoringCase(v))); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it seems to me too relaxed to ignore the case for the value by default. I would stick with equalTo letting the developers choose themselves if they want to ignore the case
Attempt at implementing #1