fileSystem, read method upgrade

[atherdon]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
We have one unfinished task

• rename this method to 'read'
• export it at index.js
• by using examples of write or save - extend this method, so it can accept promises as our other 3 methods doing
• add one test cover for this method at filesystem.test.js

We using promises for returning true/false and that value can be received at our tests.
Later we'll change it for accepting data from the outside of this method and will use Promises for more advanced cases.

at one of the next steps we'll pass data into generator from the outside of
our module, so methods, like we have in generateArray or measurements.js,
will be obsolete to keep from the inside

In order to get more information about this task, please compare how other
methods was upgraded with promises and make a similar one. same with tests

Method: https://github.com/GroceriStar/food-static-files-generator/blob/master/src/fileSystem.js#L11
Test: https://github.com/GroceriStar/food-static-files-generator/blob/master/tests/fileSystem.test.js#L5

Method: https://github.com/GroceriStar/food-static-files-generator/blob/master/src/fileSystem.js#L55
Test: https://github.com/GroceriStar/food-static-files-generator/blob/master/tests/fileSystem.test.js#L13

@sarthakvijayvergiya you can take this task

[atherdon]

ask a more specific question, please.

For sure it's hard from beginning to jump into a working project. don't worry - if something is not clear - we always open for discussion

[atherdon]

@svr8 @vadim9999 can you advice here?

[atherdon]

show me the code and if it will work - we'll debate about it. there some reasons for doing it. if you find a better way - ok, but code - firstly ;)

…

[atherdon]

as we have a different timezones - it will be hard to schedule something. let's do this way. - review codebase - create a separated issue with all of your questions(i think we need to have around 10 of them or in other case - call was not very useful for solving one question) - and we'll answer all of your questions when we'll have time. sounds good?

[atherdon]

you can also create a separated task and explain in details why our `promises` way is not good and what you propose to do instead, take some time, imagine that someone else will work on that and put as much details as you can

…

[atherdon]

tell me if you need help

[atherdon]

you assigned to this task. you can proceed with your pull request

[atherdon]

follow this link https://github.com/GroceriStar

[atherdon]

while you not asking specific question - i need to refuse.
hope it's ok - i'm busy and also don't like calls/scheduled meetups

[atherdon]

@sarthakvijayvergiya I made a video at #209

[atherdon]

@saphal1998 check this task. i'm not sure if it was completed or not.
let's go step by step and figure it out together

[saphal1998]

I think this code is correct. Please let me know if you see any mistakes. I tried it on my local machine and it seems to work.

We using promises for returning true/false and that value can be received at our tests.
Later we'll change it for accepting data from the outside of this method and will use Promises for more advanced cases.

I'm not quite sure what this meant. Does this mean I change the resolve and reject parameters here? Please let me know.

[atherdon]

I'm not quite sure what this meant. Does this mean I change the resolve and reject parameters here? Please let me know.

No, I think this part of was actually done. Code is not formatted, but correct.

Maybe small perfectionistic improve - inside of if make !err, so important part of code goes first and error handle will go after that.

---

what about other things? other sub-tasks is covered as well? you mentioned tests - do we have test for this method? I just not remember - can you take a look?

[atherdon]

quick notes:

1. I made some changes recently at master branch. please sync your fork in order to catch them. changes related to generation process. now code looks more pretty. if you'll have issues with sync process - tell me, i'll help

---

2. I find another quick task for you - move methods from writeFile into utils. but you should do it in a smart way, so nothing will go broken because of import changes

---

3. I made a few courses related to git. Did I share them with you? I think courses completion will also help to grow your skills. tell me if you interested, i'll share a link

[saphal1998]

I made some changes recently at master branch. please sync your fork in order to catch them. changes related to generation process. now code looks more pretty. if you'll have issues with sync process - tell me, I'll help

I'm getting this error. Not sure how to solve this. Please advise.

I find another quick task for you - move methods from writeFile into utils. but you should do it in a smart way, so nothing will go broken because of import changes

Alright, I'll look into this, and get back to you if I have any queries.

I made a few courses related to git. Did I share them with you? I think courses completion will also help to grow your skills. tell me if you interested, i'll share a link

No you haven't shared them with me. Please do. I think they will be very useful for me, my git skills need some improvement.

[saphal1998]

No, I think this part of was actually done. Code is not formatted, but correct.

The code for the read method was synchronous, I just made that Asynchronous using Promises. I wanted to push that, but I'm getting the error in the 'pretty-quick' stage while committing my changes. So I can't make the PR, please advise on that.

what about other things? other sub-tasks is covered as well? you mentioned tests - do we have test for this method? I just not remember - can you take a look

There's already a test written for the method in fileSystem.test.js

[atherdon]

@saphal1998 will take a look. can you share with me link to your forked repository?
I think one test is not enough. especially if we upgrade that method.
Will you be able to create a few more tests related to read?

[saphal1998]

This is my forked repo

I think one test is not enough. especially if we upgrade that method.
Will you be able to create a few more tests related to read?

Yes, but, I'll need some time. Never created tests before. I want to learn, so give me 2 days or so. I need to look into it. If you could suggest some resources for that as well, I'd appreciate it.

[atherdon]

don't worry about time - take as much as you need

…

[atherdon]

please merge PR and re-install packages locally https://github.com/saphal1998/food-static-files-generator/pull/1

I tried to check your changes, but I can`t - because issue with prettier and lint-staged prevent you actually to commit to GitHub.

maybe you can save your changes at some other place(anoter branch) and then remove your changes and try slowly, file by file add changes and then try to commit them in order to debug an issue.

---

another way is:

1. try to run yarn lint in order to check lint locally
2. try to run yarn lint-staged -c lint-staged.config.js - it will run another checker locally and you maybe will see more detailed output that will help you to solve it

[saphal1998]

I made a few courses related to git. Did I share them with you? I think courses completion will also help to grow your skills. tell me if you interested, i'll share a link

Could you send me this?

[atherdon]

sure, 1) https://www.udemy.com/course/git-basics-and-merging-process/?couponCode=PRODUCTHUNTROCKS 2) https://www.udemy.com/course/git-workflows-in-depth/?couponCode=PRODUCTHUNTROCKS

…

[saphal1998]

Will you be able to create a few more tests related to read?

I've written a couple of tests which you can find on my forked repo. They are working locally and have some linting issues only. Can you please advise as to how to proceed? I have not been able to remove these errors.

[atherdon]

yes, linting can drive me crazy as well. especially for the beginning. but it's a very great tool that keep our code in a good shape. there can be a few quick ways to do that. 1) first of all you can just google error output and figure out how to fix it. 2) bad approach but quick - apply rule that will skip linting for this file so you will be albe to open a pull request with your changes 3) comment your code and open a pull request as well. both 2-3 is not the best ways, but at least we will be able to talk about it at pull request section and i'll be able to checkout it locally

[atherdon]

@saphal1998 I think i can close this task, right?

[saphal1998]

Yes