feat(ErrorLogger): accept object instead array - I137

[flagoon]

Signed-off-by: Pawel -Muody- Kochanek [email protected]

Issue #137

ErrorLogger was accepting an array of objects and there was possible issue with duplicate errors. The task was to change array to object.

Changes

• change 'errorComponentGenerator' function. Right now it's mapping over keys of error object, not array as before.
• change propTypes, not errors are required object, not array
• change error value in tests
• in action.js, instead errors.length, we use Object.keys(errors).length.

Flags

• There were not many changes I made, main change was iteration over Object.keys instead of errors array. The rest was written such a way I just made some fine tuning. Also in tests I just change the errors object structure. After that, all errors passed.

[flagoon]

This is perfectly correct but if you map directly over Object.entries then you have directly the key and the value. So you don't need to access your map to get the value :

Object.entries(errors).map(([key, value]) => ... )

Nice trick with destructuring the values in.map(). I decided not to use entries and I didn't like to call variable[0] and variable[1]. I'm just wondering, if I should use key for react component key, or just value? If I use key, I would have to change keySwitchCase function. If I use value, then I have eslint error about key variable, that is not used.

[Ph0tonic]

You are right, in fact you just need the values so you can simply use the Object.values(errors).map(error => <ErrorComponent ... />) and then use this value for the key like before. In this way you won't have any eslint error about unused variables.

[flagoon]

You are right, in fact you just need the values so you can simply use the Object.values(errors).map(error => <ErrorComponent ... />) and then use this value for the key like before. In this way you won't have any eslint error about unused variables.

Thanks for this. I corrected my code and now it's more readable and easier to understand.

[jolanglinais]

This looks good to me. Great additions! I'm going to merge this in and we can iron out any possible bugs through #167