Fix response object marshalling - #618
Merged
Merged
Conversation
baberthal
added a commit
to baberthal/httparty
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 31, 2020
This PR fixes the issue(s) described in jnunemaker#713. To fix the logger option issue, I simply delete `Request.options[:logger]` when dumping. To fix the proc parser issue, I delete `Request.options[:parser]` if and only if `Request.options[:logger]` is a proc. If `Request.options[:logger]` is a regular class, `Marshal.dump` should proceed as normal. This should not affect the `Marshal.dump` behavior described in issue jnunemaker#143 and fixed by PR jnunemaker#618. I have added a feature spec to make sure marshalling the request works as intended, as well as a unit test to ensure `Marshal.load(Marshal.dump(req))` works as it should.
Merged
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Fixes #143
@jnunemaker Hi, would love to hear your feedback on this one. It looks fine, but I could've forget something