gokulchandra commented 5 years ago

Initial implementation for #52.

I considered both the approaches mentioned in the issue.

DSL on params

Simple, straightforward
It was at the request level
Limited to just the query params

Defining an interceptor

Defined at the client level
Potential to access other aspects of the Request for signing the request

Different services sign their requests differently eg: amazon vs twitter

@rybalkinsd But would it be more flexible to let user the user define their own interceptor? Thoughts?

We can further refactor the implementation based on the design we arrive at.

codecov[bot] commented 5 years ago

Codecov Report

Merging #68 into master will increase coverage by 0.21%. The diff coverage is 100%.

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master      #68      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     94.76%   94.97%   +0.21%     
- Complexity       86       89       +3     
============================================
  Files            21       22       +1     
  Lines           210      219       +9     
  Branches         13       13              
============================================
+ Hits            199      208       +9     
  Misses            2        2              
  Partials          9        9

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ	Complexity Δ
...balkinsd/kohttp/interceptors/SigningInterceptor.kt	`100% <100%> (ø)`	`2 <2> (?)`

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 8323e1a...75c1d85. Read the comment docs.