OpenAPI-Specification VS supertest

gRPC A little more background on how our control-plane used to work: we had an HTTP-based API gateway that talked to our gRPC monolithic backend service.6 We thought about extending gRPC streaming from our backend to clients…but the API-gateway handled auth and connections for us and doing gRPC in our Javascript frontend wasn’t something we wanted to take on and in addition it meant that we wouldn’t be able to curl our endpoints easily. To me there’s nothing quite like curl localhost:8000 to begin understanding a service.7 Websockets Websockets would have been fun, but truthfully we didn’t need ‘em, the communication we wanted was really just getting output to our users quickly and we didn’t really need bi-directional communication. Server-Sent Events Server Sent Events (SSE) is pretty cool, enabling sending real-time updates to clients. SSE is well-supported by browsers and you can also “just curl it!”. One of the only drawbacks for us was the OpenAPI support wasn’t great at the time (see this), but our frontend team was able to work around it and in addition there wasn’t a tightly defined model for the logs output, so the benefits of using our spec (strict types) weren’t as big here compared to other parts of our API.

If we go to the OpenAPI's repository, we'll see that:

And I'll be using the OpenAPI Pet Store spec file as an example.

I saw your sibling comment about "keeping it simple," however that is a bit counter to "generates OpenAPI specifications" since those for sure are not limited to just application/json request/response bodies

I wanted to draw your attention to "normal" POST application/x-www-form-urlencoded <https://github.com/OAI/OpenAPI-Specification/blob/3.1.0/vers...> and its multipart/form-data friend <https://github.com/OAI/OpenAPI-Specification/blob/3.1.0/vers...>

The latter is likely problematic, but the former is in wide use still, including, strangely enough, the AWS API, although some of their newer services do have an application/json protocol

I know that's a lot of words, but the tl;dr would be that if you want your extension to be application/json only, then changing the description to say "OpenAPI specifications for application/json handshakes" would help the consumer be on the same page with your goals

Since FastAPI is based on OpenAPI, at this point you can also use the automatically generated docs. There are multiple options, and two are included by default. Try them out by accessing the following URLs:

This approach requires a constant context switch and is clearly not productive. Here, the OpenAPI Specification can help; you might already have it, but is it scalable? In this article, we’ll learn how to create an OpenAPI Specification document that is readable, scalable, and follows the principle of extension without modifying the existing document.

Phil Sturgeon, who along with Ben Hutton and Henry Andrews from the JSON Schema community, helped drive the push to full JSON Schema Draft 2020-12 compliance, has written a blog post for the official OpenAPIs.org website on how to transition your OAS documents from v3.0.x to v3.1.0.

In this article, we will be learning how to document API written in Node.js using a tool called Swagger. Swagger allows you to describe the structure of your APIs so that machines can read them. The ability of APIs to describe their own structure is the root of all awesomeness in Swagger. Why is it so great? Well, by reading our API’s structure, swagger can automatically build beautiful and interactive API documentation. It can also automatically generate client libraries for your API in many languages and explore other possibilities like automated testing. Swagger does this by asking our API to return a YAML or JSON that contains a detailed description of your entire API. This file is essentially a resource listing of our API which adheres to OpenAPI Specifications.

You may encounter APIs described as RESTful that do not meet these criteria. This is often the result of bottom-up coding, where top-down design should have been used. Another thing to watch out for is the absence of a schema. There are alternatives, but OpenAPI is a common choice with good tools support. If you don't have a schema, you can create one by building a Postman collection.

Supertest is quite popular and easy to use test tool, you can do integration and E2E test as well, you just need to pass it the server instance or a string to make a request and assert over the response.

If the latter, there are a bunch of different options for writing automated tests. One popular way is using Jest to run your tests. If you're trying to test the backend end-to-end flow, you could use Supertest to make requests and assert on the responses.

I did something similar with a full stack Typescript project, using supertest and node-fetch. It was nice.

Unit, Integration and E2E tests using Jest and Supertest

This is why integration tests > unit tests. I really hate mocking and I never bother testing individual units that don't affect how users use my app and code. In your case, I'd just use something like supertest to test this functionality e2e.

Yes, but when every function handler is separate from the router, then you can use node-mocks-http to test each handler, to test the router is simpler to use supertest to write integration tests, for E2E tests I personally recommend [pactum](pactumjs.github.io/)

Simple booking api attempt with Typescript, Express, TypeORM and Postgres. Testing with Jest & Supertest.

In a Node.js application, writing API tests is a good start. They provide more coverage than unit testing. You can use frameworks like Supertest, Jest, or any other library that provides a high-level abstraction for testing APIs.

supertest npm package that helps test HTTP

If you want to write integration tests - https://jestjs.io - https://github.com/visionmedia/supertest