Fair enough, agreed about decoupling the problem. In that case I’d still offer
Keyword.take!/2 that works like this:

   iex> Keyword.take!([a: 1], [:a, :b])
   [a: 1]

   iex> Keyword.take!([c: 1], [:a, :b])
   ** (ArgumentError)

I think take/2 and take!/2 matches struct/2 and struct!/2.

> On 30 Dec 2020, at 11:30, José Valim <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Wojtek, I originally thought about Map.merge!, where the second argument must 
> be a subset of the first. This way we can check keys and provide default 
> values:
> 
> Keyword.merge!([parenthesis: 10], opts)
> 
> However, when I tried using this in practice, I realized that default 
> arguments are not always straight-forward to compute. For example, you may 
> want to compute them lazily. You could argue we could set them to nil in said 
> cases, but then we'd mix the absence of a key with nil value, which may not 
> be desired. 
> 
> Therefore, I concluded that it is probably best to keep those problems 
> separated and validate only the keys. I agree with Andrea that this is small 
> but the benefit I see having it in core is to promote more folks to use it. 
> Both Python and Ruby provide at the syntax-level a convenience that checks 
> only the given keys are expected. So, when it comes to options, both of these 
> languages are allowing us to write assertive code more elegantly than Elixir.
>  
> 
> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 10:10 AM Wojtek Mach <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> I think this would be a great addition to the core.
> 
> While there are libraries in this space, as silly as this may seem, solving
> this key typo problem seems like solving the 60%-80% case (not to take away
> anything from those libraries!)
> 
> How about a Keyword.take!/2?
> 
>     iex> Keyword.take!([a: 1], [:a, :b])
>     [a: 1]
> 
>     iex> Keyword.take!([c: 1], [:a, :b])
>     ** (ArgumentError) unknown key :c in [c: 1]
>   
> There are however two problems with it:
> 
> 1. would people expect that `Keyword.take!([a: 1], [:a, :b])` should fail
>    because `:b` is not in the input?
> 
>    Maybe the 2nd argument accepts defaults? (I know it probably starts doing
>    too much...)
> 
>       iex> Keyword.take!([a: 1], [:a, :b])
>       [a: 1, b: nil]
> 
>       iex> Keyword.take!([a: 1], [:a, b: 2])
>       [a: 1, b: 2]
> 
>    In fact this could have the following semantics: if there's no default, 
> it's
>    a required key:
> 
>       iex> Keyword.take!([], [:a, b: 2])
>       ** (ArgumentError) missing required key :a
> 
>    What's nice is you can later use `Keyword.fetch!/2` that will save you from
>    typos.
> 
>    But that being said, If the 2nd argument accepts a keyword, then it
>    probably shouldn't be called `take!/2` as it no longer matches `take/2`.
> 
> 2. If you do: `opts = Keyword.take!(..., ...)` and later `opts[:my_key]` you
>    still have an opportunity for a typo and you can't necessarily use
>    `Keyword.fetch!/2` because optional keys might not be there.
> 
> As Devon mentioned, structs are a really cool solution because they provide
> rigidity, defaults, and the assertive map access syntax with ".". Creating a
> struct for every function that accepts options feels like a bit much though. 
> 
> Taking everything above into consideration, perhaps there's:
> 
>     iex> Map.something_something!([], [:name, timeout: 5000])
>     ** (ArgumentError) missing required key :name
> 
>     iex> opts = Map.something_something!([name: Foo], [:name, timeout: 5000])
>     iex> opts.timeout
>     5000
> 
> and I feel like it's still relatively small addition but it's closer to the
> "80% solution". No idea how to name this thing though!
> 
> 
> 
>> On 30 Dec 2020, at 09:36, Devon Estes <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 
>> Typos are extremely hard to prevent in dynamic data structures since 
>> validations need to be implemented at the point of use instead of at the 
>> point of creation/definition of the structure. What would stop the developer 
>> from writing the typo in their validation, as José did in his example?
>> 
>> It seems to me like if the goal is to prevent typos then a struct would be 
>> the way to go.
>> 
>> Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> schrieb am Mi. 30. Dez. 2020 um 
>> 09:29:
>> Yes, but think of the valuable hours saved and the amount of code that won't 
>> have to be written.
>> 
>> I mean even Valim's own example again has the typo.
>> 
>> On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 11:58 PM Andrea Leopardi <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> Considering how straightforward the code you showed is, and that for more 
>> complex scenarios we have libraries like nimble_options, I might be slightly 
>> hesitant to add this to core.
>> 
>> Andrea
>> 
>> On Wed, 30 Dec 2020 at 08:53, José Valim <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>> 
>> I am working on a new project and yesterday I spent a couple hours on a bug 
>> due to a in a keyword list. In a nutshell, I was supposed to pass 
>> parenthesis: 10 as keywords to a function but I passed parentheses: 10.
>> 
>> I have fixed the issue by adding the following code:
>> 
>>     for {k, _} <- keyword, k not in [:parentheses, :other_options], do: 
>> raise "unknown key #{inspect(k)} in #{inspect(keyword)}"
>> 
>> The code is super straight-forward but I am wondering if we should add it to 
>> Elixir to promote said validation. What do you think? Any suggestions on 
>> where it should be defined and with which name?
>> 
>> Thank you!
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "elixir-lang-core" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGnRm4J8_RG5eeCZSw_c75Q4y19YFt-ipdnTAEa1cE2GnvwjrQ%40mail.gmail.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGnRm4J8_RG5eeCZSw_c75Q4y19YFt-ipdnTAEa1cE2GnvwjrQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
>> 
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "elixir-lang-core" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAM9Rf%2BJPu8tF2VzNB4beDqO9jc%2BF-SDE6u%3D724EZm9271jY2ug%40mail.gmail.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAM9Rf%2BJPu8tF2VzNB4beDqO9jc%2BF-SDE6u%3D724EZm9271jY2ug%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Kurtis Rainbolt-Greene,
>> Software Developer & Founder of Difference Engineers
>> 202-643-2263
>> 
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "elixir-lang-core" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAMhJPGiKh3uOaY2UNDFYu9x64n-mM7Sqf7iHU09QeAmfOY0mwQ%40mail.gmail.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAMhJPGiKh3uOaY2UNDFYu9x64n-mM7Sqf7iHU09QeAmfOY0mwQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
>> -- 
>> 
>> _________________
>> Devon Estes
>> +49 176 2356 4717
>> www.devonestes.com <http://www.devonestes.com/>
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "elixir-lang-core" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGowJcg_DWYAQsys5f6Ad1nYket8be1Lsrmui8Uh%3DzEAKzWzTQ%40mail.gmail.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGowJcg_DWYAQsys5f6Ad1nYket8be1Lsrmui8Uh%3DzEAKzWzTQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "elixir-lang-core" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/5E7686D9-1DC6-4830-8C32-7FCAFFE6E706%40wojtekmach.pl
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/5E7686D9-1DC6-4830-8C32-7FCAFFE6E706%40wojtekmach.pl?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "elixir-lang-core" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGnRm4%2B9YG1YwoK9JGAitzOzikOeo4dXCHyvu%3DjAU6SN1HRocw%40mail.gmail.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CAGnRm4%2B9YG1YwoK9JGAitzOzikOeo4dXCHyvu%3DjAU6SN1HRocw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"elixir-lang-core" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/2A76D025-BF9B-45E1-B268-DD23753FEC6C%40wojtekmach.pl.

Reply via email to