dry-rb/chat

WE MOVED TO ZULIP => https://dry-rb.zulipchat.com <=

John Backus

@backus

Thanks

Yeah I'm not too worried and I think I specified our needed behavior pretty closely

Nick Sutterer

@apotonick

@timriley i have the :params kw name ATM but it .. sucks. it feels too clumsy

Andrew Kozin

@nepalez

@jmgarnier if you're planning heavily use reader: :private as a pattern, then you would like new using method in dry-initializer:
https://github.com/dry-rb/dry-initializer/releases/tag/v0.7.0

Jean-Michel Garnier

@jmgarnier

Thanks @nepalez Things move very fast in dry-rb word, thank you for the notification :)

Tom Willis

@twillis

Hey all, was upgrading to the 0.10 series from the 0.9 series and I'm getting errors in the schemas that use rules with custom predicates...

"ArgumentError: unique_npi_number? predicate arity is invalid"

    configure do
      def unique_npi_number?(id, org_uid, npi_number)
        return true if npi_number.nil?
        existing_provider = Provider.find(org_uid: org_uid, npi_number: npi_number)
        if existing_provider && existing_provider[:provider_uid] != id
          false
        else
          true
        end
      end
    end

   ...

    rule(unique_npi_number: [:id, :org_uid, :npi_number]) do |id, org_uid, npi_number|
      npi_number.unique_npi_number?(npi_number, org_uid, id)
    end

was working just fine on the 0.9 series

Christopher Dennl-Ortega Arrieta

@cdennl

@twillis you can now define arbitrary validation rules, check the changelog on 0.10. some stuff changed

@twillis and you put in 4 arguments to a predicate which takes 3

@twillis you can omit the npi_number argument at the function call

npi_number.unique_npi_number?(org_uid, id) should do the trick

Tom Willis

@twillis

ah ok I'll check the change log, i'd rather re-write the stuff if it's a cleaner syntax than the above. thanks so much @cdennl

Ricardo Bernardeli

@bernardeli

Hi guys! Hope you're all well. Playing with dry-struct and dry-types, and wanted to have an array with members of two types, where both types have same attribute BUT different type. Example below:

require "dry-struct"
require "dry-types"

module Types
  include Dry::Types.module
end

class Answer < Dry::Struct
  attribute :question_id, Types::String

  class Select < self
    attribute :value, Types::Hash.schema(id: Types::Int)
  end

  class Text < self
    attribute :value, Types::String
  end
end

class Survey < Dry::Struct
  attribute :answers, Types::Array.member(Answer::Text | Answer::Select)
end

Survey.new(
  answers: [
    Answer::Select.new(question_id: 1, value: {id: 10}),
    Answer::Text.new(question_id: 1, value: "foo")
  ]
)

#<Survey answers=[#<Answer::Text question_id=1 value={:id=>10}>, #<Answer::Text question_id=1 value="foo">]>

Problem here is, both answers came back as Answer::Text.

If I invert the order of the members to .member(Answer::Select | Answer::Text), things blow up.

The other thing I tried too is to have .member(Answer) since Select and Text are subclasses of Answer.

It doesn't blow up but turns Answer::Select into an Answer, getting rid of attribute :value.

Ricardo Bernardeli

@bernardeli

How can I achieve members of an array to accepting subclasses of a type?

Appreciate if someone can shed some light for me! :)

Tim Riley

@timriley

If you could both post these up to https://discuss.dry-rb.org, we’ll see if we can get some answers for you - this is where we’re trying to handle support questions like this.

Ricardo Bernardeli

@bernardeli

Cool - will do!

Thanks Tim!

Tim Riley

@timriley

:pray:

Nick Sutterer

@apotonick

hey @timriley i have a question about dry-auto_inject (again), because i decided we're not using dry-initializer (we don't need coercion, types, etc. at this point), but we simply have two arguments initialize(params, options) where options are all the dependencies injected

now i have two things

how would i extend Ai to "eat" the two-arg version params, options? (i think you hinted this twice already)
can we change Ai to not add any readers but only merge the auto-injected parameters into the options hash? that would all happen on the class-level

Nick Sutterer

@apotonick

@timriley i see that i might have to write my own strategy. fine with that, but you gotta help me!!! :tea:

Yurii Danyliak

@yuriidanyliak

Hey guys! Just a quick question: is there some ability to use dry-validation output with form_for or deliver the results of validation to front-end in some elegant way?

Nick Sutterer

@apotonick

@yuriidanyliak yes, with reform!

Yurii Danyliak

@yuriidanyliak

Hello @apotonick ! Yes, already read about reform-rails. Is there any way to use schema output with reform?

Nick Sutterer

@apotonick

schema "output", what is that?

you can use reform with dry-validation, it's pretty amazing

Yurii Danyliak

@yuriidanyliak

Sorry, going to clarify.

Nick Sutterer

@apotonick

;)

Yurii Danyliak

@yuriidanyliak

http://dry-rb.org/gems/dry-validation/

UserSchema.call({}).output :)

you can use reform with dry-validation, it's pretty amazing

Great, OK then!

Will try, thanks Nick! BTW: you had great presentation at #pivorak!

Nick Sutterer

@apotonick

oh thanks :blush: it was a fantastic audience, really!

Yurii Danyliak

@yuriidanyliak

:blush: have a nice weekend

Nick Sutterer

@apotonick

go try reform, i can help you with everything, but @fran-worley is our pro

Yurii Danyliak

@yuriidanyliak

Ok )

Tim Riley

@timriley

@apotonick if I don't have a new baby at start of the work, I'll see if I can take a quick stab at a strategy for you

Nick Sutterer

@apotonick

@timriley :heart_eyes: so, i would basically not implement define_initializer, right?

my initializer looks like

def initialize(params, options)
  @options = options #this is the dependency hash
end

so i kinda want to avoid the overriding from Ai

because we don't need separate instance variables per dependency, i store them all in one hash

@yuriidanyliak what does Schema#output do?

Yurii Danyliak

@yuriidanyliak

output's result of validation, those data that passed the validation of schema

@apotonick, usually using like

validation = schema.call(params)
validation.success? ? validation.output : validation.messages

Tim Riley

@timriley

Yeah, looks like you could skip defining the initializer, @apotonick

Nick Sutterer

@apotonick

@timriley i'll play with it now and let ya know

Where communities thrive

People

Repo info

Activity