Remove bail out behavior if one of the entrypoints does not exist

[ceoro9]

If one of the provided entry points is invalid(probably it does exist), then we SHOULDN'T bail out.

Why? Because this is completely surprising behavior for API.

If I have a list of valid entry points(at least I think so, in reality just one of them can be invalid. Mb typo or anything else, whatever). Then I try to run them, I'll get nothing in result. Exactly nothing. Not the error, just success saying nothing was run.

What am I supposed to think of? I see my correct entry points and they're not run. This is so confusing.

The predictable behavior in that case would be throw an error, saying one of your entry points does not exist. Or just ignore the invalid entry points. The correct choice depends on the executed operation. If it's Get(means result should be returned), then error is more natural. If it's Find(like searching for something), then ignoring of non-existent entry points is totally fine.

Since in our case we got a look up(lookupByMultipleIdOrName), then ignoring is our choice.

Btw making some warning about the invalid entry points would be great, do we have a logger or anything like this?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 91.05%. Comparing base (09e11bc) to head (dd22b7d).
Report is 262 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #1165   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    91.05%   91.05%           
========================================
  Files           42       42           
  Lines         2593     2593           
  Branches       752      752           
========================================
  Hits          2361     2361           
  Misses         232      232           

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration	79.52% <0.00%> (ø)
legacy	55.61% <0.00%> (ø)
unit	49.59% <100.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[codenirvana]

Agree that this is an unexpected behavior but I would rather like to bail out early with an error than executing an invalid (with missing items) run.

[ceoro9]

@codenirvana , I'm totally fine to throw an error. Thank you for response 🙏🏼 I ll modify the code right in the current PR.

[codenirvana]

@ceoro9 Actually, there's an abortOnError runner option (refer to this test) which you can set to make sure the run terminates with an error.

[ceoro9]

@codenirvana , cool. I ll use it. Thank you. Any other comments on code?