Clojurians Log v2

is there a way to have different map layouts, I wanted to do something like this

[:map [:coord [:or 
               [:map {:closed true}]
               [:map {:closed true} [:x int? :y int?]]]]]
{:coord {}}
{:coord {:x 1 :y 1}}

@oliver.marks I think this works if you use for the second :map:

[:map {:closed true} [:x int?] [:y int?]]

yeah that works for the second map, just not sure how to make it work also for an empty map I tried putting optional in various places and tried :or and a few other things oh I might have missed some brackets above but its more an an illustration of one of the methods I tried

[:map {:closed true :optional true} [:x int?] [:y int?]]

I tried it with your :or above and that worked (after adding the missing brackets)

this passes ? {:coord {}} when I run it through m/valid i get missing keys or I was yesterday when I was testing 😛

nice, I will re check what I have maybe there was a different error which I did not spot

@alpox

[:map [:coord [:or 
               [:map {:closed true}]
               [:map {:closed true}
               [:x {:optional false} int?]
               [:y {:optional false} int?]]]]]

what about that, I think because the key do not have the optional map the :or is irrelevant anyway

although perhaps thats it, perhaps its optional thats messing me up looking at your screenshot again I can see it fails when one of the keys are missing

@alpox thanks for your rubber ducking, not an issue with malli I had 2 schmeas with similar name and was updating the wrong one 😕

Oups 🙂 np

I constantly get the feeling that I'm missing a schema to talk about map schemas in terms of key-value pairs

an annoying example to implement is mutual exclusion, such as a map which can have x, y and (z or u)

where z and u have different value types, too

@ikitommi I've created https://github.com/metosin/malli/issues/472 with a test case which demonstrates the issue.

@richard.hundt I profiled you example, it looks like CPU mostly goes towards parsing the schema. If you wrap every def-ed schema with a schema constructor it seems to be way more efficient, would you mind trying?

D'you mean just wrapping it in a function which returns the structure? (I'm not sure what you mean by "schema constructor")

like so;

(def A1
  (m/schema
   [:map
    {:encode/test {:leave encode} :decode/test decode}
    [:type [:= "A1"]]
    [:value float?]
    ]))

thanks, I'll try

m/schema parses the children once

your implementation has no way to cache these results

It's a bother to do from scratch, you can take this

thanks slack, very helpful

thank you

https://gist.github.com/bsless/28a20f7e8f21f01fd93a788cf65444d4

there, more convenient

yeah, that's pretty much instant now, I'll try it on our production code

👍

Perfect. Thanks Ben! What shall I do with the github issue? Do I close it, or are you planning on making changes to parsing?

Hear hear. I think something like malli-keys-relations should be there. With qualified keywords, it’s less boilerplate (but, still has):

[:or 
 [:map ::x ::y ::z]
 [:map ::x ::y ::u]]

spec-style would be:

[:map ::x ::y [:keys/or ::y ::u]]

maybe:

[:and
 [:map ::x ::y ::z ::u]
 [:keys/or ::z ::u]]

… and the mandatory JSON Schema way for this: https://json-schema.org/understanding-json-schema/reference/conditionals.html

I closed the issue, no plans on making the parser faster or caching at the moment. Thanks for @ben.sless for digging into this 🙇

I think it is worth to leave a comment on the issue and perhaps a note in the readme regarding references to uncompiled schemas

And you're welcome 🙂 Turns out I was completely wrong regarding the transformers and satisfies?

I see you left a comment with a link to the gist, so that would leave only the readme

JSON Schema's BNF was one of the motivations for it

> map which contains at least one ::x where ::x is [:or [:x int?] [:y float?]]

If we had it we could define JSON Schema with malli (translating the ebnf is straightforward), then define encoders and decoders to transform between the two

if you have idea what and where to write this, please do 🙂

added a video of the new function instrumention. three apis: advanced, normal users and for the lazy: https://github.com/metosin/malli/pull/471

comments welcome