Refactor the TTD usage and add test #40
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
wi101
commented
Feb 28, 2024
test/spec/modules/userId_spec.js
Outdated
| @@ -644,9 +644,9 @@ describe('User ID', function () { | |||
| it('pbjs.getUserIdsAsEids should prioritize user ids according to config available to core', () => { | |||
| init(config); | |||
| setSubmoduleRegistry([ | |||
| createMockIdSubmodule('mockId1Module', {id: {uid2: {id: 'uid2_value'}}}), | |||
| createMockIdSubmodule('mockId1Module', {id: {uid2: {id: 'uid2_value'}, tdid: {id: 'uid1_value'}}}), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
here I try to address this comment: https://github.com/prebid/Prebid.js/pull/11119/files#r1496636311
peixunzhang
approved these changes
Feb 28, 2024
mschuwalow
reviewed
Feb 28, 2024
| @@ -236,7 +237,9 @@ export const liveIntentIdSubmodule = { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| if (value.thetradedesk) { | |||
| result.thetradedesk = { 'id': value.thetradedesk, ext: { provider: getRefererInfo().domain || LI_PROVIDER_DOMAIN } } | |||
| result.lipb = {...result.lipb, tdid: value.thetradedesk} | |||
| result.tdid = { 'id': value.thetradedesk, ext: { rtiPartner: 'TDID', provider: getRefererInfo().domain || LI_PROVIDER_DOMAIN } } | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why getRefererInfo().domain here? Seems like we are not doing this elsewhere
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes it was requested by Deepthi, #31 (comment)
mschuwalow
approved these changes
Feb 28, 2024
3link
reviewed
Feb 29, 2024
test/spec/modules/userId_spec.js
Outdated
| @@ -667,6 +667,7 @@ describe('User ID', function () { | |||
|
|
|||
| const ids = { | |||
| 'uid2': { id: 'uid2_value_from_mockId3Module' }, | |||
| 'uid1': { id: 'uid1_value_from_mockId3Module' }, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you should add uid1: ['mockId1Module', 'mockId3Module'] in line 657 to have the priorities explicit and this line you then can test if the value from the mockId1Module has won - if I understand the intention of the test correctly.
Maybe it would also be worth putting it into a separate test case?
3link
approved these changes
Mar 4, 2024
|
PR opened: prebid#11174 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
CM-1182