Leon, perhaps you could add this code to your test suite?
boot.user=> (let [kws (atom #{})]
#_=> (clojure.walk/postwalk (fn [x] (when (qualified-keyword? x)
(swap! kws conj x)) x) (map s/form (vals (s/registry))))
(clojure.set/difference @kws (set (keys (s/registry))))
#_=> )
#{:clojure.spec.alpha/v :clojure.spec.alpha/k}
boot.user=>
On Friday, October 6, 2017 at 5:56:29 AM UTC-7, Leon Grapenthin wrote:
>
> Open maps/specs are fine.
>
> s/keys supporting unregistered specs are not.
>
> At least to me. I just fixed two more bugs in production that were would
> not have happened.
>
> What are the supposed benefits of this feature?
>
> I can only infer "being able to require keys without their spec being
> known" which is a usecase I had exactly 0.00% of the time so far.
>
> Anything I have missed?
>
> Kind regards,
> Leon.
>
>
> On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 7:05:29 PM UTC+2, Beau Fabry wrote:
>>
>> Seems like that's the reasonable place to check it, otherwise you're
>> forced into an ordering for your specs and cannot write recursive strict
>> map specs.
>>
>> On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 8:59:59 AM UTC-7, Yuri Govorushchenko
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks. This approach is also different from the macro because it will
>>> check specs existence at the validation time, not at the s/def call.
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, October 4, 2017 at 4:18:16 PM UTC+3, Moritz Ulrich wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Yuri Govorushchenko <yuri....@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>> > Thank you the pointers! So far I ended up with writing a small `map`
>>>> macro
>>>> > which is similar to `s/keys` but checks that keys are already in the
>>>> > registry:
>>>> https://gist.github.com/metametadata/5f600e20e0e9b0ce6bce146c6db429e2
>>>>
>>>> Note that you can simply combine a custom predicate and `s/keys` in
>>>> clojure.spec to verify that all keys in a given map have a underlying
>>>> spec:
>>>>
>>>> ```
>>>> (s/def ::whatever (s/and (s/keys ...)
>>>> #(every? keyword? (keys %))
>>>> #(every? (comp boolean s/get-spec) (keys %)) )
>>>> ```
>>>>
>>>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
