Refactor EventModLookup and add tests

[JonoPrest]

• moves all Js.Dict.get to optimized util
• Adds a field for quick lookup of wildcard events
• Adds test coverage of all the core functions in the module

[JonoPrest]

I think this is correct? I didn't actually want to pass in the expected error.

[DZakh]

Yes, I think it's correct to have it optional. But the field is usually used to test error messages, which I think we should also do. But I'm not sure that the Js.Exn.t is correct here, for example in Ava.js I usually use you can pass a simple object with error assertions.

[DZakh]

Let's just type it 'error

https://nodejs.org/api/assert.html#assertthrowsfn-error-message

[DZakh]

Looks very good. And having tests for error messages will make it even better :)

[DZakh]

This is the first time I see the syntax 😁

[JonoPrest]

Haha, I don't really have too strong an opinion but thought it flows better than using round brackets around the whole statement and accessing .wildcard at the end. I might use it again.

[DZakh]

Yes, I think it's correct to have it optional. But the field is usually used to test error messages, which I think we should also do. But I'm not sure that the Js.Exn.t is correct here, for example in Ava.js I usually use you can pass a simple object with error assertions.

[DZakh]

Let's just type it 'error

https://nodejs.org/api/assert.html#assertthrowsfn-error-message

[DZakh]

Suggested change

	Assert.throws(
	() => {
	Error({eventMod, errorKind})->EventModLookup.unwrapAddEventResponse(~chain=mockChain)
	},
	)
	Assert.throws(
	() => {
	Error({eventMod, errorKind})->EventModLookup.unwrapAddEventResponse(~chain=mockChain)
	},
	~error={
	"message": "I don't know what, but it should be tested"
	}
	)

[DZakh]

Also, it'll require to remove forEach