[Question] Use GET request parameters in response? about wiremock

[tomakehurst]

Additionally there's the option of a really basic templating engine (e.g. StringTemplate) so that you can replace properties:

{
  "myHeaderValue": '$$request.headers.X-My-Header$$'
}

[pmendelski]

IMHO the second option is much easier/better.

[tomakehurst]

Unfortunately this isn't possible with WireMock at the moment.

I believe SOAP UI's mock REST server will allow you to do this via Groovy scriptlets if that's any help.

[illaz]

Thank you for the quick answer and the hint.
Even if I prefer WireMock, I think, I have to use SOAP UI in this case.

[pmendelski]

Do you plan to include this feature in wiremock 2.0?

[tomakehurst]

You can already do it by implementing a response transformer extension, albeit with a little work.

I'm considering some options here - perhaps extensions that ship with WireMock but aren't activated by default to e.g. execute Javascript or template the response. Trying to figure out how to do it without adding too much bloat.

[pmendelski]

Thanks for quick update. I would appreciate another comment on this issue when you figure it out.

[tomakehurst]

I'll do my best to remember :-)

Which approach are you more interested in: scripted or templated?

[pmendelski]

Thanks for goodwill ;-)

Both approaches are interesting. Could you give a basic mapping example of each of them?
Scenario is simple. Lets reuse a json object property from request body in the response.

[tomakehurst]

I was thinking of adding an extension that called a user-supplied Javascript function to determine the response e.g.

// Copy the request body into the response body
function transformResponse(request, responseBuilder) {
  responseBuilder.body(request.body);
}

[pmendelski]

In most cases I would go with the second option. I believe that first one would be useful in some edge cases.

[tomakehurst]

I like the 1st one because a) there's already a JS engine available in the JVM, and b) JSON is easy in JS.

But the 2nd is probably easiest when you just want to inject one or two values, which might be the majority case.

[pmendelski]

A "real life" example. In my team we have an agreement that every successful POST request will result in a 201 response with a Location header and body that will contain created entity. In most cases the response body is similar to the request body but enriched with few fields (like an id).

In this case perfect solution would be to inherit request body and add missing fields.

[tomakehurst]

OK, thanks for the input. Will consider that when I get round to doing this.