for rails we probably need to integrate with their
AS::Dependencies so it knows about constants loaded by the system
Definitely you have to know a signature of the method to call super properly if you're going to change the signature
Not sure if
super without () would forward arguments if defined as *args
Just tried in
irb
class MyClass
extend Dry::Initializer::Mixin
param :foo
param :bar
def initialize(*args)
# do some custom initialization stuff here
super # calling super without () will forward all arguments
end
end
I don't want to duplicate schema validations in domain validators
@keeperhood yes it would. My example displays that you principally can add new arguments of the initializer that does not defined by dry-initializer. But this time you should know what arguments to send to super explicitly.
What Dry::Initializer::Mixin does is provides a module with #initialize method defined, and then includes the module to the class. If you wish not to pollute your class scope with helpers (like param and option), you can make this inclusion explicitly:
class MyClass
include Dry::Initializer.define -> do
param :foo
param :bar
end
endIn any case what you get is the module with initialize method in a sequence of class ancestors. Then you can work with it via super in a common ruby way.
BTW for at the boundary schema validations do you think they should validate that values are filled and such, or just type validations?
I'm leaning towards just type validations
I duplicated the word duplication
Yeah same with me, but thinking about it more, I don't think it's an issue
i.e. with something like:
module Web
module Blog
module Schemas
module Posts
Update = Dry::Validation.Form do
required(:id, :int).value(:int?)
required(:post).schema do
required(:title, :str).value(:str?)
required(:content, :str).value(:str?)
end
end
end
end
end
end
module Blog
module Validators
module Posts
Update = Dry::Validation.Schema do
required(:id)
required(:title).filled(min_size?: 3)
required(:content).filled(min_size?: 100)
end
end
end
end
Although in the second case, messages doesn't report on the missing id
require 'dry-validation'
module Blog
module Validators
module Posts
Update = Dry::Validation.Schema do
required(:id)
end
end
end
end
Blog::Validators::Posts::Update.({})
# => #<Dry::Validation::Result output={} messages={}>
Take it that's a bug?
There was some chat about it in here within the last couple of days IIRC
having a dry-v schema with a rule about the key but not the value
Although in this case adding
.filled is valid
That's where the earlier discussion was
My uneasy feeling about the code you've posted is that I feel like I'd probably want my type specs to be inside my domain validation too
otherwise it feels... incomplete
uhm, perhaps I assumed it worked because of this one I18n backend is no longer required and set by default (solnic). Might be related?