search

dry-rb / dry-types

Flexible type system for Ruby with coercions and constraints
https://dry-rb.org/gems/dry-types
MIT License
861 stars 134 forks source link

Give Enum types a name with meaningful information #460

Open krainboltgreene opened 1 year ago

krainboltgreene commented 1 year ago

The name of enum types don't display their state information.

Given: Strict::String.enum(['pending', 'active', 'frozen', 'in_review', 'banned', 'incomplete']).optional.name Before: String | NilClass After: String[pending|active|frozen|in_review|banned|incomplete] | NilClass

krainboltgreene commented 1 year ago

I can add tests/docs after I get some feedback (or none if this isn't desired).

flash-gordon commented 1 year ago

This makes perfect sense to me.

krainboltgreene commented 1 year ago

So I just used this as a patch in my own project and I'm noticing that Strict::String.enum([:a, :b, :c])['a'] raises a constraint error. First off I'm not sure why that type annotation is allowed if they're not the same? Maybe I should write a patch for that as well? And second this seems to imply we should call inspect() on the values.

flash-gordon commented 1 year ago

So I just used this as a patch in my own project and I'm noticing that Strict::String.enum([:a, :b, :c])['a'] raises a constraint error. First off I'm not sure why that type annotation is allowed if they're not the same? Maybe I should write a patch for that as well?

Can you file a separate issue on this? It's not hard to fix, we just don't seem to check that passed values meet the constraints. We already fixed in for default types so that Types::String.default(:a) throws an error

And second this seems to imply we should call inspect() on the values.

I agree, but I suggest skipping .inspect on strings. The output would be nicer.