Closed cbaker6 closed 2 years ago
@Climbatize @vdkdamian can you check if this branch solves the problem?
Also check if all other functionality works as normal. I'll take a further look later...
Merging #332 (afbd466) into main (96232f3) will decrease coverage by
0.08%
. The diff coverage is100.00%
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #332 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 85.11% 85.03% -0.09%
==========================================
Files 114 114
Lines 12116 12118 +2
==========================================
- Hits 10312 10304 -8
- Misses 1804 1814 +10
Impacted Files | Coverage Δ | |
---|---|---|
Sources/ParseSwift/Extensions/URLSession.swift | 72.72% <100.00%> (+0.26%) |
:arrow_up: |
...urces/ParseSwift/API/API+NonParseBodyCommand.swift | 74.52% <0.00%> (-1.28%) |
:arrow_down: |
Sources/ParseSwift/Types/ParseAnalytics.swift | 97.45% <0.00%> (-1.28%) |
:arrow_down: |
Sources/ParseSwift/API/API+Command.swift | 84.23% <0.00%> (-0.42%) |
:arrow_down: |
Sources/ParseSwift/Objects/ParseUser.swift | 82.25% <0.00%> (-0.37%) |
: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 96232f3...afbd466. Read the comment docs.
@Climbatize @vdkdamian can you check if this branch solves the problem?
Also check if all other functionality works as normal. I'll take a further look later...
I'll adopt to this branch now, and let you know in the next few days if any of the testers experienced issues.
Tested this on all of the playground examples and it works along with not disturbing other code. The change makes sense logically and should be fine to add as ParseObject
's don't look like ParseError
's.
@cbaker6 I currently haven't experienced any issues with the change either. LGTM
@vdkdamian thanks for checking!
I am still getting this error using ParseSwift 4.12.2 and ParseServer 5.4.0. In the server preventLoginWithUnverifiedEmail
and verifyUserEmails
are set to true
. The error that I am getting is the one of #313.
Should I create a new issue? @cbaker6
New Pull Request Checklist
Issue Description
Currently tries to decode response as object before checking for error.
Related issue: #313
Approach
Always check if an error can be decoded first.
TODOs before merging