Our Team Lead proposed exciting things when we tried to cover our API endpoint (.NET language) with a contract test, which required binary content in the request body. But, as Matt Fellows mentioned, we cannot interpret new ArrayBuffer(0) in something at JSON.
So, my question is - can we allow engineers to use new ArrayBuffer(0) in withRequest.body, but with interpretation to something like empty JavaScript object ( {} ) or something "magic" actions. In any case, this allowed us to write more honest contract tests, with explicit marks, that we expected to use in the request body - new ArrayBuffer(0) and can verify that in the generated pact specification.
Our Team Lead proposed exciting things when we tried to cover our API endpoint (.NET language) with a contract test, which required binary content in the request body. But, as Matt Fellows mentioned, we cannot interpret
new ArrayBuffer(0)
in something at JSON. So, my question is - can we allow engineers to usenew ArrayBuffer(0)
in withRequest.body, but with interpretation to something like empty JavaScript object ( {} ) or something "magic" actions. In any case, this allowed us to write more honest contract tests, with explicit marks, that we expected to use in the request body -new ArrayBuffer(0)
and can verify that in the generated pact specification.https://pact.canny.io/admin/board/feature-requests/p/allow-using-new-arraybuffer0-in-withrequestbody-to-be-honest-in-the-contract-tes