feat: support ad-hoc calls

[nagtilak]

MOBC-272 Metasys REST API Basic Services library should support ad-hoc calls

[hicksjacobp]

I'd expect to see some tests to verify behavior of the changes.

[hicksjacobp]

Generally minor; just needs to tie off some details I think.

[nagtilak]

Latest `Flurl` has breaking changes in `FlurlHttpException` class. The `Call` member of `HttpCall` type is now `FlurlCall`. Initially I tried updating it but because of breaking changes ignored it. Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>

________________________________ From: Jacob Hicks ***@***.***> Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2023 11:39:04 PM To: metasys-server/basic-services-dotnet ***@***.***> Cc: Manoj Tukaram Nagtilak ***@***.***>; Author ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [metasys-server/basic-services-dotnet] feat: support ad-hoc calls (PR #129) @hicksjacobp commented on this pull request.

________________________________ In MetasysServices.Tests/MetasysClientTests.cs<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fmetasys-server%2Fbasic-services-dotnet%2Fpull%2F129%23discussion_r1088183967&data=05%7C01%7Cmanoj.tukaram.nagtilak%40jci.com%7C9d64542dfbb4406c322408daffc86980%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C638103533481598062%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=2tYUjudlyIOW2cNczWZ9xhx1ay13dRYA9Z7U%2BhzAMTI%3D&reserved=0>:

+ .WithQueryParamValue("fqr", "itemReference")

+ .With(call => call.Request.RequestUri.Fragment.StartsWith("#fragment1")) + .Times(1); + } + + [Test] + public async Task TestSendAsyncCheckRequestHeadersAreUsed() + { + var requestUrl = "api/v5-preview/someController/someAction"; + var httpRequest = new HttpRequestMessage(HttpMethod.Get, requestUrl); + httpRequest.Headers.Add("Accept", "application/json"); + await client.SendAsync(httpRequest); + + httpTest.ShouldHaveCalled($"https://hostname/{requestUrl}") + .WithVerb(HttpMethod.Get) + .WithHeader("Accept") I think this failure is showing that our code is not correct! I'm seeing that the flurlRequest.WithHeaders function is expecting an object or an IDictionary, yet you're providing an instance of HttpRequestHeaders, which is neither. So I'm guessing it's not properly converting to the right headers. I did some debugging on my own and found that the flurl HTTP assertion was finding the header value to be String[], which is clearly wrong! I think this is all due to the clash between HTTP technically supporting multiple values for a header, but older versions of flurl didn't (and this repo currently is using an old version of flurl). See tmenier/Flurl#541<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftmenier%2FFlurl%2Fissues%2F541&data=05%7C01%7Cmanoj.tukaram.nagtilak%40jci.com%7C9d64542dfbb4406c322408daffc86980%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C638103533481598062%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=WXYD7ITMMnYZWNJM%2FQOcD2lviH8fOgT2pZvYxAosrB8%3D&reserved=0>. I doubt we want to take on updating flurl for this PR, but this is something @Federico-Artioli<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FFederico-Artioli&data=05%7C01%7Cmanoj.tukaram.nagtilak%40jci.com%7C9d64542dfbb4406c322408daffc86980%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C638103533481598062%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=IglLY300DiybHlyI%2Bwk9Jw4LEGJFa0KSi8B1NenwU4c%3D&reserved=0> needs to address. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fmetasys-server%2Fbasic-services-dotnet%2Fpull%2F129%23discussion_r1088183967&data=05%7C01%7Cmanoj.tukaram.nagtilak%40jci.com%7C9d64542dfbb4406c322408daffc86980%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C638103533481598062%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=2tYUjudlyIOW2cNczWZ9xhx1ay13dRYA9Z7U%2BhzAMTI%3D&reserved=0>, or unsubscribe<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fnotifications%2Funsubscribe-auth%2FAQLMD4M5WWXBKFCJYOHFZSDWUK4UBANCNFSM6AAAAAAUD4EEK4&data=05%7C01%7Cmanoj.tukaram.nagtilak%40jci.com%7C9d64542dfbb4406c322408daffc86980%7Ca1f1e2147ded45b681a19e8ae3459641%7C0%7C0%7C638103533481598062%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=thxYi%2BkbbvdjYpO3Zgf%2BoiMK7g9fKiwTmcKXS9X00ec%3D&reserved=0>. You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[hicksjacobp]

@nagtilak I believe this is ready for moving out of draft and getting @Federico-Artioli to review/approve.