[spec] Add support for a non-short-circuiting variant of clojure.spec.alpha/and
Description
Environment
Activity
David Chelimsky February 1, 2018 at 9:26 PM
I'll file a separate issue for that.
David Chelimsky February 1, 2018 at 9:26 PM
Actually, I think I just discovered a bug related to this. Following on the examples above:
user=> (s/explain ::e {::a 1 ::b 2})
val: #:user{:a 1, :b 2} fails spec: :user/e predicate: (contains? % :user/c)
val: #:user{:a 1, :b 2} fails spec: :user/e predicate: (< (:user/a %) (:user/b %))
nilThis should pass (< (:user/a %) (:user/b %))
Alex Miller February 1, 2018 at 3:37 PM
Re the conformer - no, it's by design that conformed values don't flow in s/merge (and is in line with the notion of "not flowing" that goes with "satisfies all"). Re leaving it open, that's up to you. We have talked about creating a non-flowing and variant but I don't think there's a ticket for it.
David Chelimsky February 1, 2018 at 3:23 PM
So I've got this close to working with a custom generator. Do you want to leave this issue open?
David Chelimsky February 1, 2018 at 3:07 PM
Got it. The other part of my specific problem, not reflected in this example, is that I've got a conformer in the middle that the last predicate relies on. s/merge won't work in that case because the conformer can't generate. Would you like a separate issue for that?
Details
Assignee
UnassignedUnassignedReporter
David ChelimskyDavid ChelimskyLabels
Priority
MajorAffects versions
Details
Details
Assignee
Reporter
David ChelimskyLabels
Priority
Major
Consider this example:
$ clj Clojure 1.9.0 user=> (require '[clojure.spec.alpha :as s]) nil user=> (s/def ::a int?) :user/a user=> (s/def ::b int?) :user/b user=> (s/def ::c int?) :user/c user=> (s/def ::d (s/and (s/keys :req [::a ::b ::c]) #(< (::a %) (::b %)))) :user/d user=> (s/explain-data ::d {::a 1 ::b 0}) #:clojure.spec.alpha{:problems ({:path [], :pred (clojure.core/fn [%] (clojure.core/contains? % :user/c)), :val #:user{:a 1, :b 0}, :via [:user/d], :in []}), :spec :user/d, :value #:user{:a 1, :b 0}} user=> (s/explain-data ::d {::a 1 ::b 0 ::c 2}) #:clojure.spec.alpha{:problems [{:path [], :pred (clojure.core/fn [%] (clojure.core/< (:user/a %) (:user/b %))), :val #:user{:a 1, :b 0, :c 2}, :via [:user/d], :in []}], :spec :user/d, :value #:user{:a 1, :b 0, :c 2}}I'd like a way to get the first invocation of explain-data to include the missing ::c and the failing < predicate. I understand that spec/and is designed to short circuit, so perhaps this could be solved with a new function that processes n specs independently.