Giters

gratifyguy / botkit-mock

Write tests for Botkit.

Geek Repo:Geek Repo

Github PK Tool:Github PK Tool

Error in initialUserMessage() and storage missing

opened this issue · comments

commented

  1. You messed up the initialUserMessage() method in line 146 of BotMock, so it does not work with actual regular expressions. You take a RegEx, convert it into a String and then convert it back to a RegEx. So if I use a RegEx: /someRegEx/ it is converted to //someRegEx//i.
    So I solved it like this:

        let p = obj.pattern;

    if (Array.isArray(obj.pattern)) {
        for (let i = 0;i < p.length;i++) {
            if ((message.text || message).match(new RegExp(p[i], 'i'))) {
                message.match = (message.text || message).match(p);

                return (message.text || message).match(new RegExp(p[i], 'i'));
            }
        }
    } else {
        if ((message.text || message).match(new RegExp(p, 'i'))) {
            message.match = (message.text || message).match(new RegExp(p, 'i'))
        }
    }

    return (message.text || message).match(new RegExp(p, 'i'));

  2. BotMock.js does not support simple_storage:
    If you want to support that just add the simple_storage.js to your requirements, then you only have to add:

        memory_store: {
        users: {

        },
        channels: {

        },
        teams: {

        },
    }

    to line 11:
    line 11:

        this.botkit = {
        tasks: [],
        log: function(){}
    };

    Additionally, if you want to access the storage with your Bot you have to add the team_id or user_id to the call back:
    See this example:
    add

        this.convo.sourceMessage.username = message.username;

    to

        this.convo.sourceMessage.user = message.user;
    this.convo.sourceMessage.channel = message.user;

    in line line 77, 78

and
to line 245

        channel: this.sourceMessage.channel

add:

        user: this.sourceMessage.username
commented

Thank you. Looking into this and making changes to BotMock master. Will close this issue and comment our changes to this issue when master is updated.

commented

@TabeaSpahn

1: We agree, merged here - 7d04e0e

  1. Please submit a PR and we will merge
commented

@amplicity I'm working on tests that will involve simple_storage. I was just curious why you didn't address item 2 above in @TabeaSpahn's issue. Is there another way to approach testing with storage?

commented

Slipped past us. Reopening and will push the simple storage mods soon.