`HandlerLike` signature doesn't match actual `server.Handler`. Missing `connInfo` about superdeno HOT 5 CLOSED

Yeah good point - guessing noticed this because you rely on connInfo in a handler using the std lib http server?

Alongside supporting std lib, we also want to support the likes of oak etc., e.g. see https://github.com/oakserver/oak#handle-method.

The second conn arg for Oak is a superset of connInfo I implemented for the std lib so suspect can just passing the full conn and that should work for most / all use-cases. Will just need some loose typing, e.g.

interface ConnLike extends ConnInfo {}

from superdeno.

@asos-craigmorten , yea that sounds reasonable. I haven't looked into the other frameworks/tools this library tries to support tho.. And when testing I guess it can just pass in a fake ConnLike or make a method to allow the user to specify it? Something like:

superdeno(...)
  .setConn()

?

from superdeno.

@asos-craigmorten , yea that sounds reasonable. I haven't looked into the other frameworks/tools this library tries to support tho.. And when testing I guess it can just pass in a fake ConnLike or make a method to allow the user to specify it? Something like:

superdeno(...)
  .setConn()

?

Okay, I took a look at the code and find my previous statement doesn't make much sense and the connection info is not easy to mock in this case. Looks like we just need to fix the typing and actually pass the connInfo to the handler function in the managed server instance.

from superdeno.

Going to reopen as think this is valid, and be good to keep to track the fix/feature (depending on how see it!)

from superdeno.

I'm rewriting tinyhttp for native http and I faced a similar problem. The app.handle needs both req and connInfo

from superdeno.