Clojurians Log v2

I’m not sure if this is useful or relevant to your goals, but: https://gist.github.com/telekid/f2e588718dbdfe48306d64e5388bdc15

hi, quick question, given a spec ::my-map based on req and opt how could i get a list of the keys that this spec pertains to? Should i be parsing s/form or is there an easier way?

@marques.goncalves.fel haven’t seen that. please write an issue to spec-tools and you could check also spec-coerce or coax - many libs doing mostly/exactly the same.

🍅 vs 🍅

I haven't tested extensively the cljs part personally, tests pass but that's it for now

This just bit me while writing :postconditions, where I wanted to assert that the return value was (among other things) a "status", but did not want to assert anything else: this is at an edge API where data has been transformed into external representations (timestamps to ISO8601 date strings, for example):

(s/def ::a string?)
(s/def ::b string?)

(s/def ::foo (s/keys :req [::a ::b]))
;; Let's define ::bar, which is not concerned with ::b at all:
(s/def ::bar (s/keys :req [::a]))

;; This is expected:
(s/valid? ::foo {::a "a" ::b "b"}) => true
(s/valid? ::foo {::a "a" ::b 1}) => false

;; But even though ::bar is not concerned with ::b, validation fails. I was hoping to only check if something
;; is a valid ::bar, without asserting anything about keys that are not in :req or :opt in ::bar.
(s/valid? ::bar {::a "a" ::b 1}) => false

all keys are checked by s/keys (even (s/keys) is a valid and useful spec)

if you want to limit, you could select-keys on the data first, or validate the attributes specifically

That was unexpected, I somehow got used to reading s/valid? as "tell me if this thing is a valid ::bar". Especially since it takes a parameter — (s/validate {:data :foo}) is intuitively different from (s/valid? ::foo {:data :foo}).

Perhaps I'm using it wrong, but I would find the ability to check just "is this a valid ::bar ?" very useful.

Good to know! Thanks for mentioning it. It seems odd to me that we would associate a value that is not a valid ::b with the very specific qualified keyword of ::b in a map. Perhaps this indicates that in the :bar maps should be using a different key, like :b.

@jrychter That makes sense for unqualified keys but part of the idea behind Spec for qualified keys is that they are globally unique (within your program) and therefore if :foo/bar is present in a hash map, it should conform to the Spec for :foo/bar if any. s/keys is more about required/optional anyway (and that's emphasized in Spec 2 via schema and select).

the big idea is that spec gives named attributes global semantics

if you have global semantics, it's ok (and good) to validate them when you see them

if that's bad then either the spec is bad (b/c it doesn't fully encompass what that attribute can mean), or your data is bad (b/c it doesn't conform to the global semantics) or your version of "valid" does not match spec's semantics :)