Support Array, Set and Dictionary #12
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Closes #9
Fixturewasn't able to produce a value for collections unless it was registered already. I thought of two ways to handle this more generically:Element(orKey&Value) were already registered, we could return a collection with a single element of those types (this keeps things non-deterministic)I was going to bake custom behaviour into
Fixture.value(for:overrides:)but I instead opted to just makeArray,SetandDictionaryconform toFixtureProviding. I was a bit on the fence about this since I didn't really want to conform system types to the public protocol (which is why we have the registration system in the first place) but the only other option was to have a separate similar internal protocol and that didn't make sense either.Since this is a system type, and it's a protocol that we own, I don't see that adding
FixtureProvidingconformance ourselves is such a big problem. If it becomes one in the future though, we can revisit for sure.