Thanks, Beau.
I am still interested why this default behavior has been chosen. It doesn't
seem like a reasonable trade-off at this point.
It enables me to say: "The map must have this key", without specifying how
the data mapped to it will look like.
If I ever wanted to do that, I could as well spec that key with "any?".
What are other benefits? They must justify the expense of likely runtime
errors.
On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 5:34:16 PM UTC+2, Beau Fabry wrote:
>
> Leon, perhaps you could add this code to your test suite?
>
> boot.user=> (let [kws (atom #{})]
> #_=> (clojure.walk/postwalk (fn [x] (when (qualified-keyword? x)
> (swap! kws conj x)) x) (map s/form (vals (s/registry))))
> (clojure.set/difference @kws (set (keys (s/registry))))
> #_=> )
> #{:clojure.spec.alpha/v :clojure.spec.alpha/k}
> boot.user=>
>
> On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 5:56:29 AM UTC-7, Leon Grapenthin wrote:
>>
>> Open maps/specs are fine.
>>
>> s/keys supporting unregistered specs are not.
>>
>> At least to me. I just fixed two more bugs in production that were would
>> not have happened.
>>
>> What are the supposed benefits of this feature?
>>
>> I can only infer "being able to require keys without their spec being
>> known" which is a usecase I had exactly 0.00% of the time so far.
>>
>> Anything I have missed?
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Leon.
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 7:05:29 PM UTC+2, Beau Fabry wrote:
>>>
>>> Seems like that's the reasonable place to check it, otherwise you're
>>> forced into an ordering for your specs and cannot write recursive strict
>>> map specs.
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 8:59:59 AM UTC-7, Yuri Govorushchenko
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks. This approach is also different from the macro because it will
>>>> check specs existence at the validation time, not at the s/def call.
>>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 4:18:16 PM UTC+3, Moritz Ulrich wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Yuri Govorushchenko <yuri....@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Thank you the pointers! So far I ended up with writing a small `map`
>>>>> macro
>>>>> > which is similar to `s/keys` but checks that keys are already in the
>>>>> > registry:
>>>>> https://gist.github.com/metametadata/5f600e20e0e9b0ce6bce146c6db429e2
>>>>>
>>>>> Note that you can simply combine a custom predicate and `s/keys` in
>>>>> clojure.spec to verify that all keys in a given map have a underlying
>>>>> spec:
>>>>>
>>>>> ```
>>>>> (s/def ::whatever (s/and (s/keys ...)
>>>>> #(every? keyword? (keys %))
>>>>> #(every? (comp boolean s/get-spec) (keys %))
>>>>> )
>>>>> ```
>>>>>
>>>>
--
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.
