Allow a Storage implementation to be passed into the LocalStorage adapter #195
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The current implementation of the LocalStorage adapter relied directly on the browsers
window.localStorage
. These changes maintain the current behavior and allow devs to initialize the LocalStorage with a differentStorage
interface. I've defined theStorage
interface to allow synchronous or asynchronous methods.This change also allows LokiDB to persist information on platforms that don't offer indexedDB or FS. This is the case for React Native, or other implementations that don't support IndexedDB, by allowing devs to provide a storage interface, React Native's Async Storage can now be fed to LokiDB as a persistent storage mean.
Also took the chance that I had to edit the tests to ensure other implementations could fit into those interfaces, so I've introduced 2 mocked-storages, async and sync, to ensure the intended behavior works as expected. As the tests were not using the async/await feature, ended up rewriting those.
PR Checklist
Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:
PR Type
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
What is the current behavior?
Issue Number: N/A
What is the new behavior?
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
Other information