refactor(location)!: rename definition city to city_pattern

[xDivisionByZerox]

Fixes #2021, #1471.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #2094 (001202b) into next (5ad55a5) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 99.16%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             next    #2094   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   99.59%   99.59%           
=======================================
  Files        2567     2567           
  Lines      243363   243365    +2     
  Branches     1249     1253    +4     
=======================================
+ Hits       242373   242387   +14     
+ Misses        963      951   -12     
  Partials       27       27           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/definitions/location.ts	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/locales/af_ZA/location/city_pattern.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/locales/ar/location/city_pattern.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/locales/az/location/city_pattern.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/locales/cs_CZ/location/city_pattern.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/locales/de/location/city_pattern.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/locales/de_AT/location/city_pattern.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/locales/de_CH/location/city_pattern.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/locales/dv/location/city_pattern.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/locales/el/location/city_pattern.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
... and 108 more

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[matthewmayer]

this doesn't actually fix #2021 though right? Because the two methods still return different data.

[Shinigami92]

this doesn't actually fix #2021 though right? Because the two methods still return different data.

• Merge faker.location.city() and faker.location.cityName() #2021 (comment)

We will start without a generated/fictional parameter and will add that back when users request them. (This avoids breaking the API when removing the parameter if unneeded)

[matthewmayer]

But i mean even after this PR is merged, say

fakerEN.location.city() and fakerEN.location.cityName()
fakerDE.location.city() and fakerDE.location.cityName()

do not behave the same, so there would need to be another PR before #2021 is considered fixed?

[xDivisionByZerox]

But i mean even after this PR is merged, say

fakerEN.location.city() and fakerEN.location.cityName() fakerDE.location.city() and fakerDE.location.cityName()

do not behave the same, so there would need to be another PR before #2021 is considered fixed?

No, because location.city() already returns a superset of location.cityName().
I have explained this to you this in #2070 (comment)

[matthewmayer]

ok then maybe #2021 should be renamed? Because the methods are not being merged.

[matthewmayer]

in what way does location.city() return a superset of location.cityName()?

fakerDE.location.cityName() can return Düsseldorf but fakerDE.location.city() will never return Düsseldorf

[xDivisionByZerox]

in what way does location.city() return a superset of location.cityName()?

fakerDE.location.cityName() can return Düsseldorf but fakerDE.location.city() will never return Düsseldorf

In that case, that's an issue with the fakerDE instance. Not the method implementation.

[matthewmayer]

Right so these locales will need fixing in a seperate PR if we want city() to also return their real city names

[
'de', 'dv', 'en',
'en_CA', 'it', 'ka_GE',
'ko', 'nb_NO', 'ne',
'ro', 'tr', 'uk',
'ur'
]

[xDivisionByZerox]

The following locales are in fact able to return real city names:

• dv
• en
• ne
• ro
• tr
• uk