Add more adapter tests

[relekang]

• [x] Check return type of adapter functions
• [x] get of key that has no views
• [x] getAll filtering of pathnames
• [x] get filtering of time
• [x] getAll filtering of time

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #53 into master will decrease coverage by 3.09%. The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master      #53     +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage   71.13%   68.04%   -3.1%     
=========================================
  Files           6        6             
  Lines          97       97             
  Branches       20       20             
=========================================
- Hits           69       66      -3     
  Misses         28       28             
- Partials        0        3      +3

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/index.js	0% <0%> (-7.7%)	:arrow_down:
src/db.js	77.77% <0%> (-5.56%)	:arrow_down:
src/handler.js	70.27% <0%> (-2.71%)	:arrow_down:

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov. Last update 2add293...e8ea59e. Read the comment docs.

[relekang]

@mxstbr If you have any suggestions for tests we need for adapters please add to the list the PR description.

[mxstbr]

Can't think of anything else at the moment, this is looking great!

[relekang]

This is ready for review now ✌️

[mxstbr]

We should add a shitton more tests with a bunch of different scenarios (and edge cases?) that could happen so we make sure all adapters are 100% correct, but that's a possible enhancement in the future. This is great!

[relekang]

Yeah, I agree that we can do that outside this PR.