Minor Changes
-
#2906
f6c7977
Thanks @gcanti! - ## Refactoring of theParseIssue
ModelThe
ParseIssue
model in the@effect/schema/ParseResult
module has undergone a comprehensive redesign and simplification that enhances its expressiveness without compromising functionality. This section explores the motivation and details of this refactoring.Enhanced
Schema.filter
APIThe
Schema.filter
API has been improved to support more complex filtering that can involve multiple properties of a struct. This is especially useful for validations that compare two fields, such as ensuring that apassword
field matches aconfirm_password
field, a common requirement in form validations.Previous Limitations:
Previously, while it was possible to implement a filter that compared two fields, there was no straightforward way to attach validation messages to a specific field. This posed challenges, especially in form validations where precise error reporting is crucial.
Example of Previous Implementation:
import { ArrayFormatter, Schema } from "@effect/schema"; import { Either } from "effect"; const Password = Schema.Trim.pipe(Schema.minLength(1)); const MyForm = Schema.Struct({ password: Password, confirm_password: Password, }).pipe( Schema.filter((input) => { if (input.password !== input.confirm_password) { return "Passwords do not match"; } }), ); console.log( "%o", Schema.decodeUnknownEither(MyForm)({ password: "abc", confirm_password: "d", }).pipe(Either.mapLeft((error) => ArrayFormatter.formatErrorSync(error))), ); /* { _id: 'Either', _tag: 'Left', left: [ { _tag: 'Type', path: [], message: 'Passwords do not match' } ] } */
In this scenario, while the filter functionally works, the lack of a specific error path (
path: []
) means errors are not as descriptive or helpful as they could be.Specifying Error Paths
With the new improvements, it's now possible to specify an error path along with the message, which enhances error specificity and is particularly beneficial for integration with tools like
react-hook-form
.Updated Implementation Example:
import { ArrayFormatter, Schema } from "@effect/schema"; import { Either } from "effect"; const Password = Schema.Trim.pipe(Schema.minLength(1)); const MyForm = Schema.Struct({ password: Password, confirm_password: Password, }).pipe( Schema.filter((input) => { if (input.password !== input.confirm_password) { return { path: ["confirm_password"], message: "Passwords do not match", }; } }), ); console.log( "%o", Schema.decodeUnknownEither(MyForm)({ password: "abc", confirm_password: "d", }).pipe(Either.mapLeft((error) => ArrayFormatter.formatErrorSync(error))), ); /* { _id: 'Either', _tag: 'Left', left: [ { _tag: 'Type', path: [ 'confirm_password' ], message: 'Passwords do not match' } ] } */
This modification allows the error to be directly associated with the
confirm_password
field, improving clarity for the end-user.Multiple Error Reporting
The refactored API also supports reporting multiple issues at once, which is useful in forms where several validation checks might fail simultaneously.
Example of Multiple Issues Reporting:
import { ArrayFormatter, Schema } from "@effect/schema"; import { Either } from "effect"; const Password = Schema.Trim.pipe(Schema.minLength(1)); const OptionalString = Schema.optional(Schema.String); const MyForm = Schema.Struct({ password: Password, confirm_password: Password, name: OptionalString, surname: OptionalString, }).pipe( Schema.filter((input) => { const issues: Array<Schema.FilterIssue> = []; // passwords must match if (input.password !== input.confirm_password) { issues.push({ path: ["confirm_password"], message: "Passwords do not match", }); } // either name or surname must be present if (!input.name && !input.surname) { issues.push({ path: ["surname"], message: "Surname must be present if name is not present", }); } return issues; }), ); console.log( "%o", Schema.decodeUnknownEither(MyForm)({ password: "abc", confirm_password: "d", }).pipe(Either.mapLeft((error) => ArrayFormatter.formatErrorSync(error))), ); /* { _id: 'Either', _tag: 'Left', left: [ { _tag: 'Type', path: [ 'confirm_password' ], message: 'Passwords do not match' }, { _tag: 'Type', path: [ 'surname' ], message: 'Surname must be present if name is not present' } ] } */
The new
ParseIssue
ModelThe
ParseIssue
type has undergone a significant restructuring to improve its expressiveness and simplicity. This new model categorizes issues into leaf and composite types, enhancing clarity and making error handling more systematic.Structure of
ParseIsssue
Type:export type ParseIssue = // leaf | Type | Missing | Unexpected | Forbidden // composite | Pointer | Refinement | Transformation | Composite;
Key Changes in the Model:
-
New Members:
Composite
: A new class that aggregates multipleParseIssue
instances.Missing
: Identifies when a required element or value is absent.Unexpected
: Flags unexpected elements or values in the input.Pointer
: Points to the part of the data structure where an issue occurs.
-
Removed Members:
- Previous categories like
Declaration
,TupleType
,TypeLiteral
,Union
,Member
,Key
, andIndex
have been consolidated under theComposite
type for a more streamlined approach.
- Previous categories like
Definition of
Composite
:interface Composite { readonly _tag: "Composite"; readonly ast: AST.Annotated; readonly actual: unknown; readonly issues: ParseIssue | NonEmptyReadonlyArray<ParseIssue>; readonly output?: unknown; }
Refined Error Messaging System
We've updated our internal function
getErrorMessage
to enhance how error messages are formatted throughout our application. This function constructs an error message that includes the reason for the error, additional details, the path to where the error occurred, and the schema's AST representation if available.Example
import { JSONSchema, Schema } from "@effect/schema"; JSONSchema.make(Schema.Struct({ a: Schema.Void })); /* throws: Error: Missing annotation at path: ["a"] details: Generating a JSON Schema for this schema requires a "jsonSchema" annotation schema (VoidKeyword): void */
Enhancing Tuples with Element Annotations
Annotations are used to add metadata to tuple elements, which can describe the purpose or requirements of each element more clearly. This can be particularly useful when generating documentation or JSON schemas from your schemas.
import { JSONSchema, Schema } from "@effect/schema"; // Defining a tuple with annotations for each coordinate in a point const Point = Schema.Tuple( Schema.element(Schema.Number).annotations({ title: "X", description: "X coordinate", }), Schema.optionalElement(Schema.Number).annotations({ title: "Y", description: "optional Y coordinate", }), ); // Generating a JSON Schema from the tuple console.log(JSONSchema.make(Point)); /* Output: { '$schema': 'http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#', type: 'array', minItems: 1, items: [ { type: 'number', description: 'X coordinate', title: 'X' }, { type: 'number', description: 'optional Y coordinate', title: 'Y' } ], additionalItems: false } */
Missing messages
You can provide custom messages for missing fields or elements using the new
missingMessage
annotation.Example (missing field)
import { Schema } from "@effect/schema"; const Person = Schema.Struct({ name: Schema.propertySignature(Schema.String).annotations({ missingMessage: () => "Name is required", }), }); Schema.decodeUnknownSync(Person)({}); /* Output: Error: { readonly name: string } └─ ["name"] └─ Name is required */
Example (missing element)
import { Schema } from "@effect/schema"; const Point = Schema.Tuple( Schema.element(Schema.Number).annotations({ missingMessage: () => "X coordinate is required", }), Schema.element(Schema.Number).annotations({ missingMessage: () => "Y coordinate is required", }), ); Schema.decodeUnknownSync(Point)([], { errors: "all" }); /* Output: Error: readonly [number, number] ├─ [0] │ └─ X coordinate is required └─ [1] └─ Y coordinate is required */
Streamlining Annotations
The individual APIs that were previously used to add annotations to schemas have been removed. This change was made because these individual annotation APIs did not provide significant value and were burdensome to maintain. Instead, you can now use the
annotations
method directly or theSchema.annotations
API for apipe
-able approach.Before
import { Schema } from "@effect/schema"; // Example of adding an identifier using a dedicated API const schema = Schema.String.pipe(Schema.identifier("myIdentitifer"));
Now
import { Schema } from "@effect/schema"; // Directly using the annotations method const schema = Schema.String.annotations({ identifier: "myIdentitifer" }); // or const schema2 = Schema.String.pipe( // Using the annotations function in a pipe-able format Schema.annotations({ identifier: "myIdentitifer" }), );
Standardize Error Handling for
*Either
,*Sync
andasserts
APIsNow the
*Sync
andasserts
APIs throw aParseError
while before they was throwing a simpleError
with acause
containing aParseIssue
import { ParseResult, Schema } from "@effect/schema"; try { Schema.decodeUnknownSync(Schema.String)(null); } catch (e) { console.log(ParseResult.isParseError(e)); // true } const asserts: (u: unknown) => asserts u is string = Schema.asserts( Schema.String, ); try { asserts(null); } catch (e) { console.log(ParseResult.isParseError(e)); // true }
List of Changes
AST
- add
MissingMessageAnnotation
annotations - add
Type
- remove
verbose
option fromtoString()
methods
Breaking
- rename
Element
toOptionalType
and add anannotations
field - change
TupleType
definition: fromrest: ReadonlyArray<AST>
torest: ReadonlyArray<Type>
- remove
TemplateLiteral.make
Schema
- add
missingMessage
annotation toPropertySignature
- add
FilterIssue
helper interface
Breaking
- remove
TupleType.Element
type - replace
OptionalElement
API interface withElement
API interface - remove
PropertySignature.GetToken
- remove duplicated annotation APIs
message
identifier
title
description
examples
default
documentation
jsonSchema
equivalence
concurrency
concurrency
parseIssueTitle
- remove
Secret
andSecretFromSelf
ParseResult
- add
isParseError
type guard
Breaking
ParseIssue
refactoring- make
Missing
andUnexpected
parse issues - replace
Declaration
withComposite
- remove
Union
in favour ofComposite
- remove
TypeLiteral
in favour ofComposite
- remove
TupleType
in favour ofComposite
- remove
Member
class - merge
Key
andIndex
intoPointer
Type
- change
message
field fromOption<string>
tostring | undefined
- change
Refinement
- rename
error
field toissue
- rename
Transformation
- rename
error
field toissue
- rename
Missing
- add
ast: AST.Type
field - add
message
field - add
actual
field
- add
Unexpected
- replace
ast
field with amessage
field - add
actual
field
- replace
- make
ParseError
- rename
error
property toissue
- rename
- remove
missing
export - Standardize Error Handling for
*Either
,*Sync
andasserts
APIs, closes #2968
-
Patch Changes
- Updated dependencies [
a67b8fe
]:- effect@3.3.4