Update guards.md && custom-decorators.md

[qd-xiaowang]

PR Checklist

Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:

• The commit message follows our guidelines: https://github.com/nestjs/docs.nestjs.com/blob/master/content/guards.md
  https://github.com/nestjs/docs.nestjs.com/blob/master/content/custom-decorators.md

PR Type

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

• Bugfix
• Feature
• Code style update (formatting, local variables)
• Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes)
• Build related changes
• Docs
• Other... Please describe:

What is the current behavior?

return matchRoles(roles, user.roles);
in guards.md

const user = request.user;
in custom-decorators.md

What is the new behavior?

By making this adjustment, Ability to call the matchRoles function.

change request.user to request.body

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

• Yes
• No

Other information

I think it adds to the understanding

Because if you import directly, an error message will be displayed

error TS2304: Cannot find name 'matchRoles'.

When I was testing the decorator, the undefine firstname appeared

[prateekkathal]

Why would we change this decorator? This is not a decorator that NestJS comes with out of the box. This is a custom decorator that people can define themselves. You are free to create a different decorator to support your use-case.

[prateekkathal]

Looks incorrect. This would return true as soon as first role is found. Doesn't match all roles.

[qd-xiaowang]

Learn a lot，thanks!

[prateekkathal]

Doesn't look this code is formatted. Kindly fix the formatting and the logic as per my previous message.

[prateekkathal]

Thanks for adding this. I don't see value in adding a private function here. Developers have there own logic to matchRoles.

I would rather just re-write this to:

return matchRoles(roles, user.roles); // Custom function to match roles

[qd-xiaowang]

Thank you very much. I have learned a lot!

…

---Original--- From: "Prateek ***@***.***> Date: Sat, Apr 20, 2024 07:04 AM To: ***@***.***>; Cc: ***@***.******@***.***>; Subject: Re: [nestjs/docs.nestjs.com] Update guards.md && custom-decorators.md(PR #3000) @prateekkathal requested changes on this pull request. In content/custom-decorators.md: > @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ import { createParamDecorator, ExecutionContext } from ***@***.***/common'; export const User = createParamDecorator( (data: string, ctx: ExecutionContext) => { const request = ctx.switchToHttp().getRequest(); - const user = request.user; + const user = request.body; Why would we change this decorator? This is not a decorator that NestJS comes with out of the box. This is a custom decorator that people can define themselves. You are free to create a different decorator to support your use-case. In content/guards.md: > } + + private matchRoles(requiredRoles: string[], userRoles: string[]): boolean { + for (const role of requiredRoles) { + if (userRoles.includes(role)) { + return true; Looks incorrect. This would return true as soon as first role is found. Doesn't match all roles. In content/guards.md: > @@ -224,7 +233,16 @@ export class RolesGuard { } const request = context.switchToHttp().getRequest(); const user = request.user; - return matchRoles(roles, user.roles); + return this.matchRoles(roles, user.roles); + } + + private matchRoles(requiredRoles: string[], userRoles: string[]): boolean { Doesn't look this code is formatted. Kindly fix the formatting and the logic as per my previous message. In content/guards.md: > @@ -202,8 +202,17 @@ export class RolesGuard implements CanActivate { } const request = context.switchToHttp().getRequest(); const user = request.user; - return matchRoles(roles, user.roles); + return this.matchRoles(roles, user.roles); Thanks for adding this. I don't see value in adding a private function here. Developers have there own logic to matchRoles. I would rather just re-write this to: return matchRoles(roles, user.roles); // Custom function to match roles — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>