fix(event_handler): Router prefix mismatch regression after Middleware feat

[leandrodamascena]

Issue number: #3255

Summary

Changes

When using a route with a prefix the Middleware execution was failing.

User experience

There are no changes to the user experience other than fixing the bug.

Checklist

If your change doesn't seem to apply, please leave them unchecked.

• Meet tenets criteria
• I have performed a self-review of this change
• Changes have been tested
• Changes are documented
• PR title follows conventional commit semantics

Is this a breaking change?

RFC issue number:

Checklist:

• Migration process documented
• Implement warnings (if it can live side by side)

Acknowledgment

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

Disclaimer: We value your time and bandwidth. As such, any pull requests created on non-triaged issues might not be successful.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (ad9e40f) 95.26% compared to head (a9c49ef) 95.27%.
Report is 5 commits behind head on develop.

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #3302      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    95.26%   95.27%   +0.01%     
===========================================
  Files          207      207              
  Lines         9581     9581              
  Branches      1756      798     -958     
===========================================
+ Hits          9127     9128       +1     
+ Misses         337      335       -2     
- Partials       117      118       +1     

Files	Coverage Δ
aws_lambda_powertools/event_handler/api_gateway.py	98.12% <100.00%> (+0.46%)	⬆️

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

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

[heitorlessa]

GREAT catch! Made suggestions to clean up the test. We ran out of time back then to get rid of parametrize, so we can do better now.

One additional suggestion I couldn't due to the UI limiting it... is to add a comment in the for loop block so we don't lose that much time figuring out that logic..

https://github.com/aws-powertools/powertools-lambda-python/pull/3302/files#diff-bdb4b43087f89fdf398381f3d88048f6182562ca67e8907259d5c56d658465c1R2012

It isn't immediately clear this block: https://github.com/aws-powertools/powertools-lambda-python/pull/3302/files#diff-bdb4b43087f89fdf398381f3d88048f6182562ca67e8907259d5c56d658465c1R2012

[heitorlessa]

There's another test we're missing to catch a regression like this --- we don't have a test where we have both strip_prefix + router prefix.

Could you add that one in too, please?

[heitorlessa]

tiny change in the latest test to make it easier to go back in the future.

Can be merged after that 🎉 !!!!!!

[sonarcloud]

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!   

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
1 Code Smell

No Coverage information
No Duplication information

[heitorlessa]

GREEEEEAAAAT JOB.

That was a pesky regression to detect