Closed jamieRowen closed 2 years ago
I don't have bandwidth to review but based on what you describe it sounds like a slam dunk of a PR. Note to Matt, I would merge #91 first and then this one will have a lot fewer relative changed lines to review.
yeh the diff between #91 and #92 is a lot clearer
this refactor was branched from my previous pull request #91 and constitutes some refactoring of the code base. this PR would either supersede it, or to be reviewed after #91 is merged
The main aim of the refactoring was to bring out bits of logic that were common across many places into simple functions with associated tests.
I also added a github action for running the tests.
refactored elemets:
sm_get
+ 2 message helper functions for rate limit infosm_get
sm_get
without an example survey or example responses from surveysstandard_request_header()
function