Instead of using http.CanonicalHeaderKey
to check if a header exists,, you can directly use the response.Header.Get(header)
method.
#62
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Hello @nytimes!
Instead of using
http.CanonicalHeaderKey
to check if a header exists, you can directly use theresponse.Header.Get(header)
method.So instead of using
validateResponseHeaderPatterns
function, instead of usinghttp.CanonicalHeaderKey
to check if a header exists, you can directly use theresponse.Header.Get(header)
method. It automatically handles case-insensitive header names.Use a switch statement instead of multiple if conditions for validating the HTTP method in the
preProcessTest
function. It will be more concise and easier to read.Extract the header validation logic from validateResponseHeaders into separate functions for each type of assertion (patterns,
notMatching
,notPresent
,ifPresentNotMatching
).This will make the code more modular and easier to understand. I've written these "updates" into this.
Cheers,
Michael Mendy