Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[SEMVER-MAJOR] DAO.create: don't return the instance #918

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 2, 2016
Merged

[SEMVER-MAJOR] DAO.create: don't return the instance #918

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
15 changes: 15 additions & 0 deletions 3.0-RELEASE-NOTES.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -34,3 +34,18 @@ checks `if (ctx.instance)` then you can remove this condition together with
the branch that follows.

See also the commit [30283291](https://github.com/strongloop/loopback-datasource-juggler/commit/30283291?w=1)

## DAO.create no longer returns the instance(s) created

While implementing support for promises in `DAO.create`, we found that this
method returns the instance object synchronously. This is inconsistent with
the usual convention of accessing the result via callback/promise and it may
not work correctly in cases where some fields like the `id` property are
generated by the database.

We have changed the API to be consistent with other DAO methods: when invoked
with a callback argument, the method does not return anything. When invoked
without any callback, a promise is returned.

See [pull request 918](https://github.com/strongloop/loopback-datasource-juggler/pull/918)
for more details.
7 changes: 2 additions & 5 deletions lib/dao.js
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ DataAccessObject.create = function(data, options, cb) {
}
cb(errors, data);
});
return data;
return;
}

var enforced = {};
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -402,10 +402,7 @@ DataAccessObject.create = function(data, options, cb) {
}, obj, cb);
}

// Does this make any sense? How would chaining be used here? -partap

// for chaining
return cb.promise || obj;
return cb.promise;
};

function stillConnecting(dataSource, obj, args) {
Expand Down
15 changes: 7 additions & 8 deletions test/manipulation.test.js
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -115,14 +115,12 @@ describe('manipulation', function() {

});

it('should return instance of object', function(done) {
it('should not return instance of object', function(done) {
var person = Person.create(function(err, p) {
p.id.should.eql(person.id);
should.exist(p.id);
if (person) person.should.not.be.an.instanceOf(Person);
done();
});
should.exist(person);
person.should.be.an.instanceOf(Person);
should.not.exist(person.id);
});

it('should not allow user-defined value for the id of object - create', function(done) {
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -235,7 +233,8 @@ describe('manipulation', function() {
{ name: 'Boltay' },
{},
];
Person.create(batch, function(e, ps) {
var res = Person.create(batch, function(e, ps) {
if (res) res.should.not.be.instanceOf(Array);
should.not.exist(e);
should.exist(ps);
ps.should.be.instanceOf(Array);
Expand All @@ -254,8 +253,8 @@ describe('manipulation', function() {
persons.should.have.lengthOf(batch.length);
persons[0].errors.should.be.false;
done();
}).should.be.instanceOf(Array);
}).should.have.lengthOf(3);
});
});
});

it('should create batch of objects with beforeCreate', function(done) {
Expand Down