Nock VS superagent

So, why would you want a REAL server to mock request/reponses? You have a lot of intercepts today that sit on the network layer and you can define things like "If you send request to that endpoint, with that json, please return that Status" (for NodeJS example, Nock - https://github.com/nock/nock)

That said, folks seem to like "recording" features in these sorts of tools (Ruby's VCR, nock, etc), so maybe there's a future where I add something similar. I've always just found the ergonomics of those features awkward to deal with, especially having to flip back and forth between tests and fixtures files to figure out what's wired to what, but maybe there's a clean solution... perhaps a "live request" mode that just prints mock code snippets of request/response pairs passing through your app.

While not mocking per say I usually use nock for http calls. You can use nock.recorder.rec() to capture the http call to play back during test, That way you are always using "live" code but not making real calls to servers.

I looked at the service which is used to get the feed URLs from a blog URL and noticed it takes the html response of the blog URL and gets the links ( tags) by checking the type attribute value against a list of valid feed values. So, I decided to use a similar approach by getting the html response for a provided URL and checking the Content-Type header against a list of valid MIME types for a feed. I ended up updating the logic to test if a URL is a feed URL, returning it if true. If the URL is found to not be a feed URL, it would try to get the feed URLs assuming the URL is a blog URL. I tested and confirmed that the new logic worked for both blog and feed URLs. Then, I added some tests for the new function I added to test for a feed URL. Testing this ended up being simpler than I expected as all I had to do was mock the response of a test url (using nock), and then check if the function returned the correct boolean value for a url. I created a PR and noticed that some of the tests in another file were now failing. While I was investigating this, I got a review on my PR, requesting me to add another test to the file which had the failing tests. That file tested the API service as a whole. I found out that nock only mocks a URL's response for one request by default. And since I was now checking for a feed URL as well, the function which returned the feed URLs from a blog URL was throwing an error since the nock for that was used up. To fix this, I had to specify in the nock statement to mock the URL response for two requests:

There are libraries like https://github.com/nock/nock to prevent mocking the whole axios.

Use nock: https://github.com/nock/nock

Going based off the documentation I sent you in my last reply, there is an example that uses nock to emulate api responses. I haven't used nock myself, but the example seems pretty simple to use. You just need to take the example and change the response object to be the shape of what your getStuffFromDatabase function returns. That way your useCategory function runs as close to normally as possible, while providing a mock response value instead of hitting the database.

If you’re willing to venture into nodejs territory, then nock is a fantastic and simple to set up http mock server. https://github.com/nock/nock

SuperAgent is a lightweight and flexible HTTP client that supports promises and callback-style syntax. It is known for its simplicity and ease of use.

You’re putting together an npm library that involves fetching data. There are many popular packages that can help you (axios, superagent, etc.) but in the spirit of not shipping bulky/redundant JS code to the browser, and the progress which browsers and JavaScript has made over the years, you try to use the platform whenever possible.

You are using Superagent and RSS parser to get the task done. Superagent and RSS parser both support callback and the Promises API (coming up next). If this code was written for the backend with Node.js, we wouldn't need the CORS proxy. It is needed for the frontend.

There is a part Api.fetchUser that is not explained, thus I don't quiet understand if that is something we need to handle with libraries like axios or superagent? or is that something else. And are saga effects like call, put etc.. equivalents of get, post? if so, why are they named that way? Essentially I am trying to figure out a correct way to perform a simple post call to my api at url example.com/sessions and pass it data like { email: 'email', password: 'password' }

Create your new project and install our lone requirement [superagent](https://www.npmjs.com/package/superagent), an HTTP client library to make HTTP requests in Node.js, by running:

SuperAgent (https://github.com/visionmedia/superagent)

Superagent is a great tool for testing API’s, you could use something like Postman, but combined with Jest you can accomplish a lot.

We will be using SuperAgent for making API requests, so let's add it to our dependency list. yarn add superagent Next, we will create a routes/__layout.svelte file, which will wrap around any of the routes in the directory.

Route tests are tests that actually call endpoints in the apis and tests for the happy path and sad paths. Supertest is the package for write route test. Supertest is built on superagent, which is an HTTP request library. So your Express app is actually called like if a user was making a request

superagent - HTTP request library.