My issues aren't about qualified or unqualified keys (and the APIs
generally need to accept unqualified keys - I do use qualified keys in
various contexts, just not this post where the topic is macros vs.
non-macro forms).
s/merge is a good point about composition. However often all I really want
to do is take some list of, say, keywords, acceptable in a map or
collection that is a parameter, and 'disj' one keyword from it for another
spec because that particular keyword isn't valid or supported for an
interface in question.
At the end of the day, I feel I'm often forced to cut and paste too many
similar but different lists into various specs (fdef in particular). The
ability to construct specs without macros might be useful.
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 6:05 AM, Alex Miller <a...@puredanger.com> wrote:
> Is there any reason why you're using unqualified keys? If you're using
> qualified keys, then a simple (s/keys) spec will validate all registered
> keys in the map so you can cover all of your optional attribute cases that
> way.
>
> Another possibility worth mentioning is using s/merge to combine
> well-known (smaller) map specs into larger combinations.
>
>
> On Monday, May 8, 2017 at 10:38:34 AM UTC-5, Dave Tenny wrote:
>>
>> Let's say I have a namespace that provides access to the database,
>> say our table has these fields (as clojure specs)
>>
>> (s/def ::job-id nat-int?) ; 1 2 3 ...
>> (s/def ::job-name string?) ; frobozz-executor
>> (s/def ::job-status keyword?) ; :queued, :in-progress, :completed
>>
>>
>> And that I have the logic in place to convert to/from the types (e.g.
>> keywords).
>>
>> If I have a simple function to return records in from the jobs table it
>> might look like:
>>
>> (s/def ::job-record (s/keys :req-un [::job-id ::job-name ::job-status]))
>>
>> (s/fdef get-jobs
>> :args (s/cat :db database-handle?)
>> :ret (s/coll-of ::job-record))
>>
>> (defn get-jobs
>> [db]
>> ... returns vector of maps, one for each record, jdbc-style ...)
>>
>> (get-jobs) => [{:job-id 1 :job-name "frobozz-executor" :job-status
>> :queued} ...]
>>
>> Now here's where things get iffy in practice. Suppose I have other
>> database interfaces that take similar but different maps or collections of
>> keywords.
>>
>> For example, a function like:
>>
>> (s/fdef get-selective-jobs
>> :args (s/cat :db database-handle? :fields (s/keys :opt-un [::job-id
>> ::job-name ::job-status])))
>>
>> (defn get-selective-jobs
>> [db fields]
>> ... return only fields from the database that are specified in the
>> fields parameter ...)
>>
>>
>> Once you start getting some similar-but-different specs, it'd be nice
>> apply a bit of code building.
>>
>> e.g.
>>
>> (def job-field-keys [::job-id ::job-name ::job-status])
>>
>> (s/def ::job-record (s/keys* :req-un job-field-keys))
>> (s/fdef get-selective-args
>> :args (s/cat* :db database-handle? :fields (s/keys :opt-un
>> job-field-keys))
>>
>> Hopefully this is conducive to some thought/discussion of the subject,
>> and/or someone can just let me know how I should be doing this if there's
>> an easy way in the present spec implementation.
>>
>> Sidewise plea: inline specs for s/keys like you can do for s/cat. s/keys
>> deliberate omision of inline specs does occasionally get in the way in
>> large namespaces.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Clojure" group.
> To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
> your first post.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "Clojure" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> topic/clojure/OBbq-jInyqI/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
