fix: modify_config_code twice with keyword values

[grzuy]

Contributor checklist

Leave anything that you believe does not apply unchecked.

• AI was not used in the creation of this PR.
• Bug fixes include regression tests
• Chores
• Documentation changes
• Features include unit/acceptance tests
• Refactoring
• Update dependencies

---

Hey @zachdaniel 👋

I spotted this issue while working on mimiquate/tower#168.

And I was able to reproduce it here with this test case. But to be honest I am not sure I am calling the right functions and with the correct expectations.

I debugged a bit and the failure lead me to a few changes around Aug 2024...

• fix: escape injected code in Common.replace_code/2 #70
• WIP: fix Config.configure/6 #71
• improvement: add failing config tests #77
• 853f275

Thanks in advance!

[grzuy]

It seems that setting format: :keyword to the ast node in the final case clause when setting the keyword value would fix the test

diff --git a/lib/igniter/code/keyword.ex b/lib/igniter/code/keyword.ex
index 57e7a2f..7448017 100644
--- a/lib/igniter/code/keyword.ex
+++ b/lib/igniter/code/keyword.ex
@@ -167,11 +167,8 @@ defmodule Igniter.Code.Keyword do
                   {{:__block__, [], [key]}, {:__block__, [], [nil]}}
                 end
 
-              [] ->
-                {{:__block__, [format: :keyword], [key]}, {:__block__, [], [nil]}}
-
               _current_node ->
-                {{:__block__, [], [key]}, {:__block__, [], [nil]}}
+                {{:__block__, [format: :keyword], [key]}, {:__block__, [], [nil]}}
             end
 
           {:ok, zipper} =

but honestly not sure this is the correct way to go nor if it has any unintended consequences.

[zachdaniel]

If making that change fixes this test and doesn't break anything else, then I'm all for it ❤️

[zachdaniel]

Would you want to include that fix here?

[grzuy]

Thanks for the feedback.

Included extra commit with that change.

Running mix test locally I only get 1 failure which I also get when running on main, so it might be something else about my local setup.

Workflow here awaiting approval to run. We'll see 🙂

[zachdaniel]

🚀 Thank you for your contribution! 🚀